^\        ;^1 


:niMi']0li  in  €itd 


ALEXANDER  ,/^(WFJ<TS^   /-.  £\ 


.{^X^XVi 


ssi  t^«  ®^«**%Jal  ^ 


^k 


PRINCETON,    N.    J. 


SM/.. 


■BSA.5.D 
.n.(oA 

Number  ..C.OX^^.. 


Division , 


Section . 


Old  Testament  Revision: 


%  PaitbIj0oh  for  dSitiglbl^  ^ijatiirs. 


ALEXANDER^  ROBERTS,    D.D., 

Professor  of  Humanity,  St.  Andrcivs,  and  Member  of  New  Testament 
Compatiy  of  Revisers  ; 

AUTHOR  OF   "  COMPANION   TO   THE   REVISED  VERSION   OF   THB 
ENGLISH  NEW   TESTAMENT,'    ETC, 


SECOND   THOUSAND. 


NEW  YORK 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS 

1883 


PREFACE. 


TT  seems  desirable,  in  view  of  the  approach- 
ing  publication  of  the  Revised  Version  of 
the  Old  Testament,  to  furnish,  in  popular 
form,  some  information  on  interesting  and 
important  points  connected  with  that  portion 
of  Scripture.  This  I  have  endeavoured  to  do 
in  the  following  little  volume.  From  the 
nature  of  the  case,  this  work  has  been  con- 
structed on  totally  different  lines  from  my 
"  Companion  to  the  Revised  Version  of  the 
New  Testament."  Comparatively  little,  for 
instance,  requires  to  be  said,  or,  indeed,  can 
be  said,  respecting  the  text  and  manuscripts 
of  the  Old  Testament — points  which  call  for 
the    utmost    care    in    dealing    with     the    New 


iv  PREFACE. 

Testament.  My  object  in  the  present  work 
has  been  to  present,  in  easy,  untechnical 
language,  a  considerable  amount  of  general  in- 
formation, which  may  enable  ordinary  English 
readers  to  peruse  with  greater  interest  and 
intelligence  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, when  these  are  set  before  them  in  the 
Revised  Version. 

I  willingly  acknowledge  that  I  have  learned 
much  on  the  subject  of  the  Old  Testament 
from  so-called  rationalistic  writers.  And  I 
trust  I  am  willing  to  learn  more  ;  for  what- 
ever commends  itself  as  true  ought  to  be 
welcomed  from  any  and  every  quarter.  At 
the  same  time,  I  am  constrained  to  say  that 
a  tone  of  dogmatism,  and  a  tendency  to  one- 
sidedness,  may  as  plainly  be  discovered  in 
the  writers  referred  to,  as  among  those  who 
belong  to  the  strictly  "  orthodox  "  class.  The 
candid  seeker  after  truth  must  be  on  his  guard 
in  dealing  with  the  statements  of  extreme  men 
on  the  one  side  as  well  as  on  the  other. 


PREFACE. 


I  have  embodied  in  the  following  pages  a 
number  of  what  appear  to  me  improved  trans- 
lations of  Old  Testament  passages,  without 
having  the  least  idea  whether  or  not  these 
have  been  adopted  by  the  Revision  Company. 
Multitudes  of  additional  emendations  will,  of 
course,  appear  in  the  Revised  Version,  although 
it  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  work  will  not  be 
marked  by  that  amount  of  minute  and  really 
needless  change  which  is  one  of  the  greatest 
weaknesses  of  the  Revised  New  Testament. 

Should  my  little  book  fall  into  the  hands 
of  any  Biblical  scholars,  I  would  respectfully 
solicit  their  attention  to  the  argument  in  behalf 
of  the  habitual  use  of  the  Greek  language 
by  Christ,  as  set  forth  in  Chapter  IX.  My 
apology  for  taking  another  opportunity  of 
handling  this  subject  is  simply  that  I  believe 
it  to  be  one  of  the  most  interesting  and  im- 
portant of  Biblical  questions.  Indeed,  should 
the  view  for  which  I  plead  as  to  the  language 
generally  used   by   Christ  be  at    last  accepted, 


vi  PREFACE. 

a   revolution    must,    to   a   considerable   extent, 
take  place  in  the  science  of  Biblical  criticism. 

To  prevent  all  possible  misunderstanding, 
it  may  be  well  to  add  that,  though  the  sheets 
of  the  Revised  Old  Testament  have,  from  time 
to  time,  been  sent  to  me,  I  am  not,  now  that 
my  book  has  been  printed,  acquainted  with  a 
single  change  of  rendering  which  the  Revisers 
have  adopted. 

A.R. 

University,  St.  Andrews, 
Dec^  zoth,  1882. 


T- 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

PAGE 

LANGUAGE     AND    CONTENTS    OF    THE    OLD    TESTA- 
MENT          I 

CHAPTER    II. 
THE  PENTATEUCH— ITS  AUTHORSHIP  AND   DATE    .      2$ 

CHAPTER  IIL 

THE  PENTATEUCH — CORRECTIONS  OF  THE  AUTHOR- 
ISED  ENGLISH  VERSION 45 

CHAPTER   IV. 

THE    PROPHETS— CORRECTIONS    OF    THE    AUTHOR- 
ISED   ENGLISH   VERSION 71 

CHAPTER  V. 

THE      HAGIOGRAPHA   —    CORRECTIONS       OF       THE 

AUTHORISED   ENGLISH   VERSION     .  •  »     93 

CHAPTER  VI. 

THE  APOCRYPHAL  BOOKS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT   II 3 

CHAPTER  VII. 

THE  TEXT  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT         •  •  .137 


viii  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

PAGE 

THE    SEPTUAGINT    AND    THE     SAMARITAN     PENTA- 
TEUCH         •  .  .    157 

CHAPTER  IX. 

THE    SEPTUAGINT — ITS  CONSTANT    USE   BY   CHRIST 

AND   HIS   APOSTLES 179 

CHAPTER  X 

THE   TALMUD   AND   THE  TARGUMS     ....   20I 

CHAPTER  XI 

VERSIONS    OF  THE    OLD   TESTAMENT    LATER    THAN 

THE  TIME   OF   CHRIST 223 

'   CHAPTER  XII. 

ENGLISH    VERSIONS  OF  THE  OLD  AND   NEW  TESTA- 
MENTS       .  •  •  •  •  .   24s 

INDEX   OF  TEXTS 273 

GENERAL  INDEX  •••••..  277 


T},r^  ^^0, 


CHAPTER  I. 

LANGUAGE  AND   CONTENTS  OP  THE   OLD 
TESTAMENT. 

ALL  the  canonical  books  of  the  Old  Testament 
are  written  throughout  in  the  Hebrew  lan- 
guage, with  the  exception  of  a  very  few  passages 
to  be  afterwards  noticed. 

The  language  thus  called  "  Hebrew "  has  been 
supposed  by  not  a  few  eminent  scholars  to  have 
acquired  its  name  from  Eber,  or  rather  (with  a 
weak  guttural  sound)  Heber,  who  is  referred  to  in 
Genesis  x.  21,  24.  But,  far  more  probably,  the 
appellation  was  derived  from  a  word  meaning 
** beyond,"  or  "on  the  further  side,"  and  was 
applied  to  Abraham  and  the  dependants  who 
accompanied  him,  because  they  had  passed  over 
from  the  other  side  of  the  great  river  Euphrates,  on 
their  way  from  Mesopotamia  to  Canaan.  The  name 
thus  given  them  by  the  people  among  whom  they 
came  to  settle,  was  adopted  by  the  immigrants 
themselves,  and  was  afterwards  used  by  them  to 
denote  the  external  relation  in  which  they  stood  to 
other  nations. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 


Hebrew  is  a  member  of  what  is  known  as  the 
Shemitic,  or  Semitic,  family  of  languages.  The 
term  "Shemitic"  has  been  applied  to  them,  because, 
according  to  the  genealogies  contained  in  the  Book 
of  Genesis,  most  of  the  nations  who  speak  them 
are  descended  from  Shem,  the  eldest  son  of  Noah. 
This  widely  spread  group  of  human  tongues  falls 
into  three  main  divisions, — the  Aramaic,  or  northern 
dialect,  the  Hebrew,  or  central  dialect,  and  the 
Arabic,  or  southern  dialect.  With  the  Aramaic  are 
connected  the  Syriac,  which,  in  a  corrupted  form, 
is  still  spoken  by  the  Druses  and  Maronites  at  the 
present  day,  and  the  cuneiform  inscriptions  which 
have  been  found  in  Babylonia  and  Assyria.  With 
the  Hebrew  there  are  connected  the  Phoenician, 
Samaritan,  and  Punic,  of  which  only  a  few  remains 
are  now  possessed.  With  the  Arabic,  again,  are 
connected  the  ancient  ^thiopic,  and  some  kindred 
forms  of  speech  ;  while  the  languages  now  spoken 
in  Malta  and  Abyssinia  exhibit  it  in  a  more  or  less 
corrupted  form ;  and  in  its  comparatively  pure  state 
Arabic  is  still  used  by  a  vast  number  of  the  inhabit- 
ants of  our  globe. 

The  great  characteristic  of  Semitic  speech  is  the 
tri-literal  composition  of  its  words.  Almost  all  the 
verbal  forms  consist  of  three  letters — neither  less 
nor  more.  And  these  letters  are  all  consonants^  the 
vowels  being  left  unwritten,   as   of   comparatively 


LANGUAGE   OF  THE   OLD    TESTAMENT.         3 

little  consequence.  This  constitutes  one  marked 
difference  between  Semitic  languages,  like  the 
Hebrew  or  Arabic,  and  Indo-European  languages, 
such  as  Sanscrit,  Greek,  German,  or  English.  In 
the  Indo-European  languages,  we  find  that,  from 
the  earliest  times,  the  consonants  were  often  vari- 
able, while  the  vowels  must  be  regarded  as  having 
been  deemed  at  least  equally  important.  But  in 
Hebrew,  as  long  as  the  language  was  a  living  one, 
and  even  for  ages  afterwards,  the  vowels  remained 
unwritten.  The  form  thus  presented  by  the  words 
may  be  exhibited  to  one  unacquainted  with  the 
original,  by  means  of  English  characters,  reading 
these,  of  course,  from  right  to  left,  as  is  the  case 
in  all  the  Semitic  languages.  Thus,  the  three  con- 
sonants L  T  K  stood  for  katal,  "  he  killed,"  and 
the  three  consonants  V  SH  Y,  for  jyashav,  "  he 
sat."  But  the  first  of  these  examples  might  also 
receive  such  a  vowel  punctuation  as  changed  the 
word  into  kotel,  "  one  who  kills,"  and  the  second 
might  be  so  pointed  as  to  change  the  preterite  into 
the  {uinxQ—jyeshev,  **  he  shall  sit."  Many  other 
words,  as  will  afterwards  be  noticed,  vary  in  sense 
much  more  than  these,  according  to  the  vowel 
pointing  which  is  adopted. 

It  follows  at  once  from  what  has  been  said,  that 
there  must  occasionally  be  room  for  difference  of 
opinion  as  to  the  exact  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  text. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 


We  shall  have  occasion  in  a  subsequent  chapter 
to  consider  more  particularly  the  value  which  should 
be  assigned  to  the  traditional  system  of  vowel 
punctuation  followed  in  our  ordinary  Hebrew  Bibles  ; 
but,  in  the  meantime,  an  example  may  be  given  of 
the  ambiguity  which  sometimes  arises  from  the  fact 
that  the  vowels  were  not  originally  written  along 
with  the  consonants.  For  an  illustration,  let  us 
turn  to  I  Kings  xvii.  6.  We  there  read  in  our 
common  version  respecting  Elijah,  that  "  the  ravens 
brought  him  bread  and  flesh  in  the  morning,  and 
bread  and  flesh  in  the  evening ;  and  he  drank  of 
the  brook."  The  word  here  translated  "ravens" 
undoubtedly  has  that  meaning  as  traditionally 
pointed,  but,  with  other  vowels,  it  may  mean  either 
"Arabians  "  or  "  inhabitants  of  Oreb."  And  there 
have  not  been  wanting  high  authorities  who  have 
preferred  one  or  other  of  these  renderings  to  that 
of  "  ravens."  The  following  are  the  remarks  of 
Dr.  Kitto  on  the  subject.  "  It  is  certain,"  he  says, 
"  that  any  person  finding  the  word  without  vowels, 
and  left  to  find  the  meaning  from  the  context, 
would  not  for  a  moment  think  of  ravens^  but  would 
fix  on  one  of  the  other  alternatives.  As  to  the 
Orebim,  there  was  a  rock  called  Oreb  (Judges  vii. 
25),  the  inhabitants  near  which  may  be  supposed 
to  have  been  so  called ;  but  this  was  on  the  other 
side   of  the   Jordan.     And    with    reference   to   the 


LANGUAGE    OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT,         5 

Arabians,  nothing  seems  to  us  more  likely  than 
that  encampments  of  Arabs  (who  still  intrude  their 
tents  into  the  border  or  waste  lands  of  settled 
countries)  would  in  this  season  of  drought  have 
been  formed  on  the  banks  of  the  brook  Cherith, 
and  (knowing  the  scarcity  of  water  elsewhere)  would 
have  remained  there  as  long  as  it  aiforded  water  to 
them — that  is,  as  long  as  Elijah  remained.  They 
were  also,  both  from  their  conditions  and  habits, 
the  very  persons  in  whose  keeping  the  secret  of  his 
retreat  was  most  safe — far  more  so  than  it  would 
have  been  with  any  townsmen,  subjects  of  Ahab. 
They  were  the  least  likely  to  know  his  person,  and 
that  he  was  sought  after  by  the  king ;  and  if  they 
did  know,  they  were  less  than  any  other  persons 
open  to  the  inducements  the  king  could  offer,  or 
the  fears  he  could  impose.  If,  however,  the  reader 
prefers  to  hold  that  the  well-disposed  inhabitants 
of  a  town  called  Oreb,  or  Orbo,  were  the  parties 
by  whom  Elijah  was  supplied  with  food,  there  are 
good  authorities  to  support  him  in  that  conclusion, 
and  to  show  that  a  small  town  of  that  name  did 
exist  near  at  hand. 

*'  As  to  the  ravens^  we  can  easily  conceive  that, 
in  an  age  when  the  love  of  the  marvellous  had 
become  absolutely  a  mania  among  the  Jews,  they 
would  by  choice  select  of  many  interpretations  the 
most  unlikely  and  wonderful ;  and  we  feel  as  assured 


OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 


that,  having  the  present  alternatives  before  them, 
they  would,  from  their  instinctive  marvellousness,* 
fix  on  this,  as  we  are  that  this  is  the  very  one  which, 
of  all  the  others,  a  man  of  plain  understanding 
would  reject.  Indeed,  the  opportunity  of  determin- 
ing the  sense  to  ravens  must  to  a  Jew  have  been 
too  delicious  to  be  neglected,  since  it  afforded 
excellent  opportunities  of  amplifying  and  illustrating 
the  matter  in  his  own  peculiar  vein. 

"The  difficulties  attending  the  common  opinion 
have  greatly  embarrassed  the  commentators.  Of  this 
a  sample  may  be  given  from  the  Synopsis  Criticorum 
of  the  elaborate  Poole :  '  Unquestionably  they 
brought  meat  dressed,  not  raw  (Gen.  ix.  i).  You  may 
ask.  Where  did  the  ravens  get  it?  Ans.  i.  From  the 
kitchen  of  King  Ahab,  or  of  Jehoshaphat.  2.  Or, 
it  was  prepared  for  him  by  some  of  the  seven 
thousand  to  whom  God  communicated  the  secret 
(i  Kings  xix.  8).  Or,  3.  The  angels  perhaps  exposed 
the  meat  in  some  certain  place,  whence  the  ravens 
brought  it.  Or,  4.  He  could  provide,  who  gave 
them  such  a  commission,  and  who  could  effect  this 
in  a  thousand  ways.  God  prepared  a  table  for  His 
servant  in  the  utmost  penury.  He  did  not  take  care 
that    wine    should   be   brought    him.'     Hales  (who 


*  So  in  writer,  meaning,  no  doubt,   ''tendency  to  t?ie  mar- 
vellous." 


LANGUAGE   OF  THE   OLD    TESTAMENT. 


takes  the  view  that  the  inhabitants  of  a  place  called 
Oreb  are  denoted)  properly  remarks  on  this  :  *  Such 
a  comment,  put  out  of  a  learned  language  into 
plain  English,  can  only  excite  a  smile,  mingled  with 
regret  that  literary  talent  should  be  so  wasted  or 
misemployed  on  idle  speculation.'  We  should  add 
that  the  Jewish  interpreters  have  not  only  suggested 
the  alternatives  mentioned  by  Poole,  but  several 
others,  among  which  one  is,  that  the  meat  was  a 
portion  of  that  which  Obadiah  provided  for  the 
prophets  whom  he  concealed  in  the  caverns."  ^ 

To  my  mind  there  seems  a  great  deal  of  force  in 
these  remarks.  It  is  true  that  the  traditional  render- 
ing has  the  weighty  suffrage  of  Josephus,  and  of  the 
ancient  versions,  in  its  favour.  But  notwithstanding 
this,  and  taking  all  things  into  account,  I  am  hardly 
prepared  to  adopt  the  very  decided  language  of  a 
recent  writer  when  he  says,  "A  vast  deal  of  inge- 
nuity has  been  devoted  to  explaining  away  Elijah's 

ravens There  is   no    escape  from  the   plain 

meaning  of  the  words — occurring  as  they  do  twice 
in  a  passage  otherwise  displaying  no  tinge  of  the 
marvellous — or  from  the  unanimity  of  all  the  Hebrew 
MSS.  of  all  the  ancient  versions,  and  of  Josephus."t 
The  truth  is,  that,  in  all  such  cases,  the  context  is  our 

*  Pictorial  Bible,  in  loc, 

f  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  art.  Elijah. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 


only  safe  guide,  and  if  that  fails  us,  nothing  certain 
can  be  said.*  This  may  be  made  pretty  plain  by 
an  illustration  in  English.  If  these  three  consonants, 
M  D  L,  stood  by  themselves,  without  any  accom- 
panying vowels,  they  might  be  understood  to  ex- 
press any  one  of  the  following  senses,  medal,  models 
modal,  meddle,  middle,  muddle,  or  perhaps  to  refer  to  a 
place  bearing  the  name  of  Mydal  or  Mydol.  The 
sentence,  however,  in  which  the  word  occurred,  taken 
in  connexion  with  other  known  circumstances,  would 
probably  render  clear  the  meaning  which  was  to  be 
attached  to  the  word.  Otherwise,  no  dogmatic 
opinion  whatever  could  be  formed  upon  the  subject ; 
and  this  should  be  borne  in  mind  in  reading  any 
translation  of  the  Old  Testament. 

Judging  by  the  varied  and  extensive  literature 
which  we  still  possess  in  the  books  of  the  Old 
Testament,  the  Hebrew  language  was  always  marked 
by  a  very  limited  vocabulary.  It  did  not  contain,  so 
far  as  we  know,  over  six  thousand  words,  and  these 
have  been  reduced  to  about  five  hundred  roots.f 
Hence    one   word    has    often    a    great    variety   of 

*  Of  course  there  is  a  presumption  in  favour  of  the  tradi- 
tional vowel  pointing ;  see  this  point  further  touched  upon  in 
chap.  vii. 

f  Max  Miiller's  Lectures  on  Language  (ist  sen),  p.  297. 


LANGUAGE   OF  THE   OLD    TESTAMENT.        9 

meanings,  and  these  apparently  very  far  separated 
from  each  other.  Thus,  the  one  word  Tor,  which, 
in  its  fundamental  signification,  seems  to  imply 
*' arrangement,"  also  signifies  *'a  way  of  acting," 
*'a  turn,"  "a  string  of  pearls,"  **a  turtle-dove," 
and  ''an  ox."  Again,  the  word  Goor,  as  denoting 
"  a  lion's  whelp,"  may  be  regarded  as  having  been 
derived  from  the  sound  which  the  animal  utters,  but 
it  is  certainly  not  easy  to  understand  how  a  verb 
Goor,  with  exactly  the  same  letters,  came  to  mean 
not  only  "to  fear,"  but  *'to  dwell,"  "to  assemble," 
"to  go  abroad,"  "to  worship."*  As  M.  Renan 
has  observed,  the  one  root  Room,  which  expresses 
the  idea  of  height,  has  given  rise  to  the  following 
related,  yet  widely  divergent,  meanings :  to  rise,  to 
strengthe?t,  to  lift  up,  to  build  a  house,  to  educate,  to 
place  in  safety,  to  render  conque?vr,  to  extol,  to  speak 
loud,  to  levy  a  tax,  to  raise  hurriedly,  to  offer  sacrifice, 
to  cherish  pride,  a  hill,  a  heap,  haughtiness,  a  sacrifice, 
a  gift.  The  same  writer  remarks  that  the  single 
root  Koom  expresses,  by  means  of  its  difi"erent  verbal 
and  noun  forms,  the  following  variety  of  meanings  : 
to  rise,  to  exist,  to  appear,  to  increase,  to  dwell,  to  persevere, 
to  approve,  to  walk  gracefully,  to  live,  to  preserve  alive, 
to  verify,  to  arrange,  to  consti'iict,  to  rebuild,  to  revolt,  to 
lift  up,  to  establish,  stature,  haughtiness,  up-standing, 

*  Canon  Farrar,  Language  and  Languages^  p,  197. 


lo  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION'. 

substance,  thing,  place,  dwelling,  rebellion,  enemy,  means 
of  resistance,  adversary.^ 

It  is  obvious  that  a  language  like  the  Hebrew, 
which  thus  expresses  such  widely  separated  mean- 
ings by  modifications  of  one  and  the  same  root, 
cannot  fail  to  be  of  a  highly  metaphorical  character. 
And  such,  accordingly,  we  find  to  be  the  case.  This 
appears  not  only  in  the  widely  ramified  senses 
attached  to  the  same  word,  as  exemplified  above, 
but  in  the  character  of  the  literature  generally.  The 
boldest  metaphors  are  constantly  employed.  God 
is  spoken  of  as  *'  a  Sun  and  a  Shield  "  (Ps.  Ixxxiv. 
ii),  and  as  ''a  Rock"  (Ps.  xviii.  31,  etc.),  as  well 
as  "a  Father"  (Isa.  Ixiii.  16,  etc.).  Wicked  men 
are  described  as  ** wolves"  (Zeph.  iii.  3),  as  "bulls" 
(Ps.  xxii.  12),  and  as  *'dogs"  (Isa.  Ivi.  10,  etc.). 
To  be  prosperous  is  to  have  one's  "horn  exalted" 
(Ps.  xcii.  10,  etc.),  and  to  be  afflicted  is  to  "melt 
away"  (Job  vi.  14),  while  to  be  humble  is  to  have 
"low  eyes"  (Job  xxii.  29).  The  Church  is  God's 
"vineyard"  (Isa.  v.  i),  and  the  care  which  He 
expends  upon  it  is  set  forth  under  the  figure  of 
"a  vine,"  at  great  length,  and  with  much  beauty 
(Ps.  Ixxx.  8  ff).  To  pardon  sin  was  to  "  cover 
it"  (2  Chron.  xxx.  18);  to  be  angry  was  to  have 
the   "nose  made  hot"  (Exod.  xxxii.    10,  etc.);   to 

*  Histoire  dcs  Langues  Semitiques,  p.  131. 


LANGUAGE   OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.       ii 

be  patient,  or  forbearing,  was  to  have  the  *'  nose 
long"  (Exod.  xxxiv.  6,  etc.);  to  be  irritable,  or 
hasty,  was  to  be  "short  of  nose"  (Prov.  xiv.  17); 
and  so  in  regard  to  a  multitude  of  other  meta- 
phorical expressions.* 

The  Semitic  languages,  as  a  whole,  approach 
much  more  nearly  to  the  primitive  type  of  human 
speech  than  do  those  of  the  Indo-European  or 
Aryan  family ;  and  among  the  Semitic  tongues,  so 
far  as  we  can  trace  them  at  the  present  day,  Hebrew 
exhibits  by  far  the  most  ancient  form.f  Not  so 
very  long  ago,  indeed,  Hebrew  was  generally  re- 
garded as  having  been  the  original  language  of 
mankind,  and  as  such  was  supposed  to  have  been 
spoken  in  Paradise.  The  vagaries  of  learned  men 
on  these  points  have  been  most  amusing.  Thus, 
we   are   told  that   Goropius,   in   a   book   published 

*  Figurative  expressions  like  the  above  are  found  at  the 
present  day  in  languages  which  are  still  in  a  comparatively  un- 
developed state.  Thus,  says  Canon  Farrar,  "  To  give  but  one 
instance  :  the  king  of  Bokhara  informed  Dr.  Wolff  that  he  had 
put  to  death  poor  Lieut.  Connolly  because  *  he  had  had  a  long 
nose,'  by  which  he  simply  meant  in  an  expressive  manner  to 
imply  that  he  was  irritable  or  proud."  {Lang,  and  Langs.,  p. 
360.)  It  will  be  noticed  that  a  different  meaning  belongs  to  this 
expression  in  Hebrew. 

f  Hertzog's  Real- Encyclopddie,  art.  Hebraische  Sprache. 
Winer  says  of  the  Hebrew,  that  it  is  "one  of  the  oldest  languages 
of  which  we  have  any  knowledge."     (R.  W.  B.,  art.  Sprache.) 


12  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

at  Antwerp  in  1580,  tried  to  prove  that  Dutch  had 
the  honour  of  having  been  the  primitive  tongue. 
Another  writer,  named  Kempe,  seriously  maintained 
that  God  spoke  in  Swedish  to  our  first  parents,  that 
Adam  answered  Him  in  Danish,  and  that  the  serpent 
addressed  Eve  in  the  French  language !  *  Others 
have  strenuously  argued  that  Basque,  with  all  its 
strange  peculiarities,  was  really  the  language  of 
Paradise  ;  but  the  claims  of  Hebrew  to  that  dis- 
tinction were  generally  allowed  to  be  pre-eminent, 
until  conclusively  disproved  by  the  researches  of 
comparative  philology.  The  science  of  language, 
which  is  scarcely  yet  a  century  old,  among  other 
great  achievements,  has  clearly  proved  that  no 
existing  tongue — not  even  Sanscrit — can  be  ac- 
cepted as  the  original  tongue  spoken  by  mankind. 
That  language  will  in  all  probability  never  be 
discovered,  although  it  may  to  some  extent  be 
conjecturally  built  up  by  bringing  together  roots 
which  are  ultimately  found  to  be  common  to  all 
languages. 

But  though  the  claim  once  put  forward  for 
Hebrew  as  having  been  man's  primitive  speech  is 
now  universally  abandoned,  it  nevertheless  has  all 
the  marks  of  a  very  high  antiquity.  It  abounds 
in  onomoiopoetic   words,  that   is,  words  derived  from 

*  Delbos'  Chapters  on  the  Science  of  Language^  p.  22. 


LANGUAGE   OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.       13 

an  imitation  of  natural  sounds,  of  which  we  have 
familiar  examples  in  our  own  language  in  such 
expressions  as  quack,  purr,  caw ;  sigh,  moan,  tvhoop ; 
clap,  clang,  whir ;  and  multitudes  of  others.  The 
nearer  a  language  is  to  its  primitive  state,  the  more 
abundant  will  such  expressions  be  found,  since  they 
are  apt  to  be  changed  with  the  lapse  of  time,  just 
as  pebbles  are  rounded  by  the  constant  action  of 
the  sea.  Hebrew,  again,  delights  in  assonances,  or 
jingles  of  words — another  undoubted  mark  of  a 
language  possessed  of  great  antiquity.  Thus,  in 
the  very  second  verse  of  the  Bible,  the  words  which 
are  rendered  in  our  authorised  version  "  without 
form  and  void,"  read  in  Hebrew,  Thohu  va-  Vohii ; 
and  many  similar  jingles  of  sounds  might  be  quoted. 
From  its  highly  metaphorical  character,  Hebrew 
is  admirably  fitted  for  the  purposes  of  poetry.  Even 
in  prose  it  is  often  marked  by  poetical  forms  of 
expression,  as  when  the  wise  woman  of  Tekoah 
says  (2  Sam.  xiv.  14),  not  only  that  "  we  must  needs 
die,"  but  adds  that  we  **are  as  water  spilt  on  the 
ground,  which  cannot  be  gathered  up  again."  As 
Dr.  Farrar  has  well  said,  a  Hebrew  "  seemed  ill  at 
ease  in  realizing  a  conception,  unless  he  could  paint 
it  in  words  confessedly  and  distinctly  picturesque;" 
and  he  adds,  that  in  the  Old  Testament,  "  People 
not  only  speak,  but  open  their  mouths  and  speak  ; 
not  only  answer,  but  answer  and  say ;   not  only  get 


14  OLD    1  EST  A  ME  NT  REVISION. 

angry,  but  their  visage  is  inflamed ;  not  only- 
sorrowful,  but  their  visage  falls  ;  do  not  merely  go 
back,  but  rise  up  and  return  to  the  place  whence 
they  came  forth ;  and  the  widow  of  Tekoah  is  not 
only  a  widow,  but  thinks  it  necessary  to  tell  David 
that  she  is  a  '  widow  woman,  and  her  husband  is 
dead.'  When,  in  the  Merry  Wives  of  Windsor,  Pistol 
uses  the  expression,  *  He  hears  with  ears,'  Sir  Hugh 
Evans  indignantly  exclaims,  *  What  phrase  is  this, 
"He  hears  with  ears"?  Why,  it  is  affectations.' 
But,  in  point  of  fact,  so  far  from  being  '  affecta- 
tions,' it  marks  the  pictorial  redundancy  of  the 
earliest  stages  of  language."  * 

When,  however,  we  come  to  look  at  the  distinct- 
ively poetical  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  we  find 
that  it  is  in  Job,  the  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Isaiah,  and 
some  of  the  other  prophets,  that  the  grandeur  of 
Hebrew  poetry  is  most  strikingly  displayed.  As  is 
well  known,  paj-allelism  is  the  feature  by  which  it 
is  specially  distinguished.  By  this,  speaking  gene- 
rally, is  meant  the  repetition  in  two  poetic  lines 
of  the  same  idea  with  slight,  if  any,  modification. 
Examples  abound  throughout  the  sacred  writings, 
and  one  or  two  may  here  be  quoted.  A  very  pure 
illustration  is  found  in  the  poetical  outburst  of 
Balaam,  recorded  in  Numbers  xxiii.  7 — 10:    it  will 

*  Lang,  and  Langs.,  p.  359. 


LANGUAGE   OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT       15 


be  observed  that  the  •  lines  run  in  couplets,  the 
second  line  always  repeating,  while  modifying,  the 
sentiment  contained  in  the  first.*  "  He  took  up 
his  parable,  and  said, — 

7.  "  From  Aram  has  Balak  brought  me, 

The  king  of  Moab  from  the  mountains  of  the  East : 

Come,  curse  me  Jacob, 

And  come,  speak  wrath  against  Israel. 

8.  How  shall  I  execrate  whom  God  hath  not  execrated  ? 
And  how  shall  I  speak  against  him  whom  God  hath  not 

spoken  against  ? 

9.  For  from  the  top  of  the  rocks  I  see  him, 
And  from  the  hills  I  behold  him  : 

Lo  !  the  people  who  shall  dwell  alone, 
And  shall  not  reckon  themselves  among  the  nations  t 
10.    Who  has  counted  the  dust  of  Jacob, 
Or  the  number  of  the  fourth  of  Israel  ? 
Let  my  soul  die  the  death  of  the  righteous, 
And  let  my  last  end  be  like  his." 

One  other  passage  may  be  given  in  illustration  of 
the  parallelism  so  characteristic  of  Hebrew  poetry. 
I  select  Job  iii.  20 — 24,  and  translate  the  passage 
as  follows : — 

*  The  examples  which  follow  illustrate  what  has  been  called 
synonymous  parallelism^  in  which  the  same  thought  is  repeated 
in  varying  but  equivalent  terms.  Bishop  Lowth  also  notices 
antithetic  parallelism,  in  which  a  point  is  brought  clearly  out 
by  its  opposite  being  set  over  against  it,  and  synthetic  or  con- 
structive pa?'ailelism,  which  depends  simply  on  the  form  of 
construction.  For  instances  of  the  former,  see  Prov.  xxvii.  6,  7, 
I  Sam.ii.  4 — 7  ;  and  of  the  latter,  Ps.  xix.  7 — 10,  Isa.  xliii.  2. 


l6  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

20.  "  Why  doth  He  give  light  to  him  that  is  miserable, 
And  life  unto  the  bitter  in  soul  ; 

21.  Who  long  for  death,  and  it  cometh  not, 
And  dig  for  it  more  than  for  hid  treasures  ; 

22.  Who  would  rejoice  exceedingly 
And  exult  if  they  could  find  a  grave  ? 

23.  Why  to  a  man  whose  way  is  hid, 
And  whom  God  hath  hedged  about? 

24.  For  my  sighing  cometh  before  my  food, 

And  my  moanings  are  poured  forth  like  water." 

"The  whole  composition  of  this  passage,"  says 
Bishop  Lowth,  "  is  admirable,  and  deserves  a 
minute  attention.  *  Wherefore  should  he  give  light 
to  the  miserable  ? '  But  who  is  the  giver  alluded 
to  }  Certainly  God  Himself,  whom  Job  has  indeed 
in  his  mind ;  but  it  escaped  his  notice  that  no 
mention  is  made  of  Him  in  the  preceding  lines. 
He  seems  to  speak  of  the  miserable  in  general, 
but  by  a  violent  and  sudden  transition  he  applies 
the  whole  to  himself.  *  But  my  groaning  cometh 
like  my  daily  food.'  It  is  plain  therefore  that  in 
all  the  preceding  reflections  he  has  himself  only 
in  view.  He  makes  a  transition  from  the  singular 
to  the  plural,  and  back  again,  a  remarkable  ampli- 
fication intervening,  expressive  of  his  desire  of 
death,  the  force  and  boldness  of  which  is  incom- 
parable :  at  last,  as  if  suddenly  recollecting  himself, 
he  returns  to  the  former  subject,  which  he  had 
apparently  quitted,   and   resumes   the   detail  of  his 


LANGUAGE   OF  THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.       17 

own  misery.  From  these  observations  I  tiiink  it 
will  be  manifest,  that  the  agitated  and  disordered 
state  of  the  speaker's  mind  is  not  more  evidently 
demonstrated  by  a  happy  boldness  of  sentiment 
and  imagery,  and  an  uncommon  force  of  language, 
than  by  the  very  form,  conduct,  and  arrangement 
of  the  whole."  ^ 

I  may  here  take  the  opportunity  of  remarking 
that,*  besides  illustrating  the  form  and  majesty  of 
Hebrew  poetry,  the  above  passage  also  suggests  the 
extreme  difficulty  which  is  frequently  felt  in  appre- 
hending the  exact  meaning  of  the  original.  It  will 
be  observed  that,  in  the  lines  specially  quoted, 
Bishop  Lowth  differs  to  some  extent  from  the 
translation  presented  above ;  and  in  some  of  the 
other  lines  he  gives  quite  a  different  turn  to  the 
passage.  Where  I  have  ventured  to  suppose  that 
the  questioning  form  of  expression  is  still  continued, 
and  have  rendered — 

"  Why  [act  thus]  to  a  man  whose  way  is  hid, 
And  whom  God  hath  hedged  about  ?  " 

the  Bishop  has — 

'*  Well  might  it  befit  the  man  whose  way  is  sheltered, 
And  whom  God  hath  surrounded  with  a  hedge." 

This  is  enough  to   suggest   to  every  candid  and 


*  Sacred  Poetry  of  the  Hebreivs,  p.  161. 


l8  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION: 

considerate  reader  of  a  version  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, how  much  may  frequently  be  said  in  favour 
of  a  somewhat  different  rendering  from  that  which 
is  preferred  by  any  translator,  however  competent, 
or  any  body  of  translators,  however  well  qualified 
for  the  task  which  they  have  undertaken.* 

Hebrew,  no  doubt,  existed  as  a  living  language 
long  before  the  earliest  period  to  which  we  are 
now  able  to  trace  it.  Its  sister  dialect,  the  Aramaic, 
exerted  no  small  influence  over  it  throughout  the 
whole  course  of  its  history,  so  far  as  that  is  known 
to  us.  In  fact,  the  popular  dialect  of  the  Israelites 
is  thought  by  scholars  to  have  approached  much 
nearer  to  the  tongue  of  Aram  than  the  extant 
Hebrew  literature  would  seem  to  indicate.f  But 
the  Old  Testament  itself  betrays  the  influence  of 
the  Aramaic.  Not  only  are  certain  books,  such  as 
Job,  Ecclesiastes,  and  others,  strongly  marked  by 
Aramaisms,  but  in  several  passages  Hebrew  is 
deserted  altogether,  and  the  writer  has  recourse  to 
the    kindred,    though    different,    language.      These 

*  I  am  glad  to  find  that  the  rendering  which  I  have  adopted 
is  supported  by  the  high  authority  of  De  Wette. 

f  Smith's  Did.,  Shemitic  Langs.,  p.  1255.  Renan  observes, 
**I1  est  a  remarquer  que  les  langues  semitiques  different  moins 
dans  la  bouche  du  peuple  que  dans  les  livres." — Lang.  Sem.y 
P  134- 


LANGUAGE   OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.      19 

passages  are  the  four  following:  (i)  Jeremiah  x.  11  ; 
(2)  Daniel  ii.  4— vii.  28;  (3)  Ezra  iv.  8 — vi.  18; 
(4)  Ezra  vii.  12 — 26.  The  reason  why  the  first  of 
these  passages  is  expressed  in  Aramaic,  and  not 
Hebrew,  may  be  conjectured  to  have  been  that  the 
captive  Jews  might  be  able  to  proclaim  to  the  ido- 
latrous nation  who  had  enslaved  them,  in  language 
which  they  could  understand,  the  folly  of  worshipping 
false  gods.  The  long  passage  in  Daniel  may  have 
been  written  in  Aramaic,  as  having  a  special  interest 
for  those  who  made  use  of  that  language  ;  and  the 
passages  in  Ezra  are  evidently  given  in  Aramaic, 
because  such   was  their  original  language. 

After  the  return  of  the  Israelites  from  the  captivity 
(about  450  B.C.),  Hebrew  speedily  died  out  as  a  living 
language,  and  was  replaced  by  Aramaic.  The  sacred 
tongue,  however,  continued  to  be  studied  by  scho- 
lars, though  no  longer  heard  on  the  lips  of  the 
people.  For  at  least  a  century  before  Christ  it  had 
ceased  to  be  used  in  writing,  as  long  previously  it 
had  been  abandoned  by  the  Jews  as  the  medium  of 
oral  intercourse  with  one  another. 

According  to  the  generally  accepted  chronology, 
the  Hebrew  literature  now  in  our  possession  extends 
from  about  2000  years  before  Christ  to  some  centu- 
ries before  the  commencement  of  our  era.  One  of 
the  most  remarkable  features  of  this  long-reaching 
series  of  literary  productions  is  the  similarity  of  form 


20  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISIOA. 

by  which,  from  first  to  last,  it  is  characterized.  This 
fact  can  hardly  be  accounted  for  except  upon  the 
theory  of  successive  redactions  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment."^ 

The  Hebrew  Bible,  as  we  now  possess  it,  comprises 
thirty-nine  books.  This  may  seem  at  first  sight 
inconsistent  with  the  statement  of  Josephus,  when 
he  tells  us  that  there  were  only  "  twenty-two  books  " 
acknowledged  as  *'  divine "  among  the  Jews  ;  that 
five  of  these  belonged  to  Moses  ;  that  thirteen  were 
ascribed  to  the  prophets ;  and  that  the  remaining 
four  consisted  of  hymns  and  practical  precepts  for 
the  guidance  of  human  life.f  But  it  is  evident  that 
the  number  twenty-two  was  artificially  adopted  to 
correspond  to  the  number  of  letters  in  the  Hebrew 
alphabet.  Several  books  which  we  reckon  separately 
were  in  this  way  counted  together.  And  it  is  clear 
that  when  Josephus  tells  us  that  "  the  prophets  who 
came  after  Moses  wrote  down  what  was  done  in  their 
times  in  thirteen  books,"  he  includes  among  "the 
prophets  "  all  the  historical  books.     The  canon  of 

*  As  will  be  noticed  in  the  following  chapter,  archaic  forms 
certainly  exist  in  the  earlier  books  of  Scripture,  but  only  to  a 
very  limited  extent.  Deutsch  states  the  case  pretty  strongly 
when  he  says  that  "  enough  remains  to  show  a  gradual  and 
important  difference  between  the  earlier  and  the  later  stages  of 
the  language  in  the  earlier  and  later  books  of  the  Old  Testament." 
— Literai'y  Remains,  p.  306. 

t  Against  Apion,  i.  8. 


LANGUAGE   OF  THE    OLD   TESTAMENT.      21 

Josephus  thus  seems  to  have  included  (i)  The  Laiv^ 
consisting  of  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers, 
Deuteronomy;  (2)"  The  Prophets,  including  Joshua, 
Judges  and  Ruth,  i  and  2  Samuel,  i  and  2  Kings, 
Isaiah,  Jeremiah  with  Lamentations,  Ezekiel,  the 
twelve  minor  Prophets,  Job,  Daniel,  i  and  2  Chron- 
icles, Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  Esther;  and  (3)  The 
Writmgs,  comprising  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Canticles,  and 
Ecclesiastes.  The  list  of  sacred  books  given  by 
Josephus  is  thus  apparently  identical  with  our  own 
at  the  present  day. 

We  learn  from  the  New  Testament  itself  that  a 
threefold  division  of  the  Old  Testament  books  ex- 
isted among  the  Jews  in  the  time  of  Christ.  Thus 
we  read,  Luke  xxiv.  44,  that  the  risen  Saviour  said  to 
His  disciples,  "  These  are  the  words  which  I  spake 
unto  you,  while  I  was  yet  with  you,  that  all  things 
must  be  fulfilled  which  were  written  in  the  law  of 
Moses,  and  in  the  Prophets,  and  m  the  Psalms, 
concerning  me."  The  term  "  Psalms "  here  repre- 
sents that  section  of  the  Old  Testament  which  is 
generally  spoken  of  under  the  technical  appellation 
of  Hagiogt'apha,  that   is,   holy  writings."^'     And   the 

*  I  venture  to  let  this  sentence  stand,  notwithstanding  the 
strong  language  of  Dr.  Robertson  Smith  to  the  opposite  effect 
{7 he  Old  Test,  injewish  Church,  p.  165).  He  calls  it'a  "ra- 
tionalising exegesis "  to  regard  the  title  Psalms  as  embracing 
the  whole  division  of  the  sacred  writings  to  which   Psalms  the 


22  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

usual  arrangement  of  the  three  classes  of  books  is 
somewhat  different  from  that  given  above  out  of 
Josephus.  It  is  as  follows  :  (i)  The  Law,  including 
the  five  books  of  Moses,  generally  styled  the  Pen- 
tateuch ;  (2)  The  Prophets,  comprising  Joshua, 
Judges,  I  and  2  Samuel,  i  and  2  Kings,  Isaiah, 
Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  the  twelve  minor  Prophets  ;  and 
(3)  The  Hagiographa,  embracing  Psalms,  Proverbs, 
Job,  Lamentations,  Esther,  Daniel,  Ezra,  Canticles, 
Ruth,  Nehemiah,  i  and  2  Chronicles,  Ecclesiastes. 
This  is  the  classification  which  we  shall  follow  in 
dealing  with  the  several  books  in  the  immediately 
succeeding  chapters. 

belonged,  but  worse  specimens  of  such  ' '  exegesis  "  might  too 
easily  be  found.  And  unless  such  books  as  Daniel,  Proverbs, 
and  Job  are  included  under  the  heading  referred  to,  they  must 
have  been  ignored  by  Christ  altogether.  Yet  the  canonicity  of 
these  books  was  universally  acknowledged  by  the  Jews  in  our 
Saviour's  day. 


CHAPTER   II 
THE   PENTATEUCH.— AUTHORSHIP  AND    DATE. 

IT  seems  hardly  possible  at  present  to  say  any- 
thing in  connection  with  the  Pentateuch,  without 
noticing  some  recent  opinions  which  have  been 
promulgated  as  to  its  authorship  and  date.  The 
view  has  of  late  been  widely  circulated  in  our 
country,  that  only  the  most  insignificant  portions 
of  it  (so  far  as  extent  is  concerned)  were  written  by 
Moses.  We  are  taught  to  regard  the  Book  of 
Deuteronomy  as  having  been  unknown  till  the  reign 
of  Josiah  (about  B.C.  621),*  while  the  Levitical  code, 
passing  under  the  name  of  Moses,  is  affirmed  to 
have  been  first  set  forth  in  the  times  of  Ezra  (about 
B.C.  520),  that  is,  immediately  after  the  return  of 
the  Jews  from  the  Babylonian  exile. 

These  somewhat  startling  opinions  have  recently 
been  maintained,  with  rare  learning  and  acuteness, 

*  This  date  is  given  by  Dr.  Robertson  Smith  as  521  B.C.,  but 
that  is  doubtless  a  misprint.  {TJie  Old  Testament  in  the  Jewish 
Church,  p.  244  ) 


24  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

by  Dr.  Robertson  Smith,  in  his  volume  of  Lectures 
entitled  "The  Old  Testament  in  the  Jewish  Church." 
The  following  extracts  from  that  work  will  suffice 
to  bring  both  the  nature  and  importance  of  his 
views  before  us  : — 

"  When  the  Levitical  law  first  comes  on  the  stage 
of  actual  history  at  the  time  of  Ezra,  it  presents 
itself  as  the  law  of  Moses.  People  who  have  not 
understood  the  Old  Testament  are  accustomed  to 
say,  with  the  usual  presumption  of  unhistorical 
rationalism,  that  this  is  either  literally  true  or  a 
lie.  The  Pentateuch  is  either  the  literary  work  of 
Moses,  or  it  is  a  barefaced  imposture.  The  reverent 
and  thoughtful  student,  who  knows  the  complicated 
difficulties  of  the  problem,  will  not  willingly  accept 
this  statement  of  the  question.  If  we  are  tied  up  to 
make  a  choice  between  these  two  alternatives,  it  is 
impossible  to  deny  that  all  the  historical  evidence 
that  has  come  before  us  points  in  the  direction  of 
the  second.  .  .  . 

**  It  is  plain  that  no  thinking  man  can  be  asked 
to  accept  the  Pentateuch  as  the  literal  work  of 
Moses  without  some  evidence  to  that  effect.  But 
evidence  a  thousand  years  after  date  is  no  evidence 
at  all,  when  the  intervening  period  bears  unanimous 
witness  in  a  different  sense.  By  insisting  that  the 
whole  Pentateuch  is  one  work  of  Moses,  and  all  of 
equal  date,   the  traditional  view  cuts  off  all  possi- 


THE  PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP,   ETC,       25 

bility  of  proof  that  its  kernel  is  Mosaic ;  for  -it  is 
certain  that  Israel,  before  the  exile,  did  not  know 
all  the  Pentateuch ;  therefore,  if  the  Pentateuch  is 
all  one,  they  did  not  know  any  part  of  it.  If  we 
are  shut  up  to  choose  between  a  Mosaic  authorship 
of  the  whole  five  books  and  the  sceptical  opinion 
that  the  Pentateuch  is  a  mere  forgery,  the  sceptics 
must  gain  their  case"  (pp.  307 — 309). 

*'  Sacrifice  is  not  necessary  to  acceptable  religion. 
,  .  .  Micah  declares  that  Jehovah  does  not  require 
sacrifice ;  He  asks  nothing  of  His  people,  but  '  to 
do  justly,  and  love  mercy,  and  walk  humbly  with 
their  God'  (Micah  vi.  8).  And  Jeremiah  (vii.  21, 
seq.)  says  in  express  words,  ''  Put  your  burnt  offerings 
to  your  sacrifices,  and  eat  fliesh.  For  I  spake  not 
to  your  fathers,  and  gave  them  no  command  in  the 
day  that  I  brought  them  out  of  Egypt,  concerning 
burnt  off"erings  or  sacrifices.  But  this  thing  com- 
manded I  them,  saying.  Obey  my  voice,  and  I  will 
be  your  God,  and  ye  shall  be  my  people,"  etc. 
(compare  Isa.  xliii.  23,  seq.).  The  position  here 
laid  down  is  perfectly  clear.  When  the  prophets 
positively  condemn  the  worship  of  their  contem- 
poraries, they  do  so  because  it  is  associated  with 
immorality,  because  by  it  Israel  hopes  to  gain  God's 
favour  without  moral  obedience.  This  does  not 
prove  that  they  have  any  objection  to  sacrifice  and 
ritual    in   the   abstract.     But   they  deny  that   these 


26  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

things  are  of  positive  divine  institution,  or  have 
any  part  in  the  scheme  on  which  Jehovah's  grace 
is  administered  in  Israel.  Jehovah,  they  say,  has 
not  enjoined  sacrifice.  This  does  not  imply  that 
He  has  never  accepted  sacrifice,  or  that  ritual 
service  is  absolutely  wrong ;  but  it  is  at  best  mere 
form,  which  does  not  purchase  any  favour  from 
Jehovah,  and  might  be  given  up  without  offence. 
It  is  impossible  to  give  a  flatter  contradiction  to  the 
traditional  theory  that  the  Levitical  system  was 
enacted  in  the  wilderness.  The  theology  of  the 
prophets  befofe  Ezekiel  has  no  place  for  the  system 
of  priestly  sacrifice  and  ritual"  (p.  287). 

**  Whence,  then,  did  the  book  (Deuteronomy) 
derive  the  authority  which  made  its  discovery  the 
signal  for  so  great  a  reformation }  How  did  it 
approve  itself  as  an  expression  of  the  Divine  will, 
first  to  Hilkiah  and  Josiah,  and  then  to  the  whole 
nation }  To  this  question  there  can  be  but  one 
answer.  The  authority  that  lay  behind  Deuteronomy 
was  the  power  of  the  prophetic  teaching  which  half 
a  century  of  persecution  had  not  been  able  to  sup- 
press. After  the  work  of  Isaiah  and  his  fellows, 
it  was  impossible  for  any  earnest  movement  of 
reformation  to  adopt  other  principles  than  those 
of  the  prophetic  word  on  which  Jehovah  Himself 
had  set  His  seal  by  the  deliverance  from  Assyria. 
What  the  Deuteronomic  code  supplied  was  a  clear 


THE  PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP,    ETC.       27 

and  practical  scheme  of  reformation  on  the  pro- 
phetic lines.  It  showed  that  it  was  possible  to 
adjust  the* old  religious  constitution  in  conformity 
with  present  needs,  and  this  was  enough  to  kindle 
into  new  flame  the  slumbering  fire  of  the  word  of 
the  prophets.  The  book  became  the  programme 
of  Josiah's  reformation,  because  it  gathered  up  in 
practical  form  the  results  of  the  great  movement 
under  Hezekiah  and  Isaiah,  and  the  new  divine 
teaching  then  given  to  Israel.  It  was  of  no  conse- 
quence to  Josiah — it  is  of  equally  little  consequence 
to  us — to  know  the  exact  date  and  authorship  of  the 
book"  (p.  362). 

Elsewhere  we  read  (p.  320),  that  "the  Pentateuch 
is  a  history  incorporating  at  least  three  bodies  of 
law."  The  first  of  these  codes  is  that  contained 
in  Exod.  xxi. — xxiii.,  and  stands  '*  in  immediate 
connection  with  the  fundamental  revelation  of  the 
ten  commandments  on  Horeb."  The  second  is  the 
law  of  Deuteronomy,  which  properly  begins  with 
chap,  xii.,  and  extends  to  chap.  xxvi.  16.  The  third 
is  the  Levitical  legislation  ''  scattered  through 
several  parts  of  Exodus  and  the  books  of  Leviticus 
and  Numbers."  Of  these  codes,  the  first  only  was 
possessed  by  the  Israelites  all  through  the  days  of 
the  Judges,  of  Solomon,  and  of  Hezekiah.  Then 
the  second,  or  Deuteronomic  code,  was  somehow 
called   into  being   about  the  time  of  Josiah.     The 


28  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 


third,  or  Levitical  legislation,  had  not  yet  been 
heard  of,  and  was,  indeed,  utterly  unknown  till  the 
days  of  Ezra,  when  it  was  announced  under  the 
name  of  Moses,  and  was  at  once  carried  into  full 
operation. 

It  must  be  clear  to  every  candid  reader  of  Dr.  R. 
Smith's  work,  that  his  great  object  is  to  establish 
what  he  regards  as  undoubtedly  the  truth  on  the 
subjects  dealt  with,  and  that  thus  the  character  of 
his  book  is  as  honest  as  its  erudition  is  remarkable. 
It  is  indeed  one  of  the  most  honourable  and  out- 
standing features  of  the  age  in  which  we  live,  that 
a  passion  for  the  true  is  growing  among  men,  and 
that  the  prepossessions  of  former  times  no  longer 
wield  the  power  which  was  so  long  accorded  them. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  many  critical  results 
have  now  been  conclusively  established  against  the 
old  traditional  opinions.  To  give  only  one  example  : 
No  one  worth  listening  to  would  deny  at  the  present 
day  that  the  Book  of  Genesis  is  composite^  that  it  is, 
in  fact,  a  congeries  of  fragments  collected  from 
many  different  sources,  and  proceeding  from  many 
different  authors.  But  the  danger  has  now  arisen 
of  supposing  that  traditional  views  must  be  wrong 
altogether,  and  that,  if  "  criticism "  has  conquered 
at  some  points,  it  must  be  held  to  have  been 
victorious  all  along   the  line.     This    is  a  fallacy  to 


THE  PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP,   ETC.      29 

be  most  carefully  guarded  against  in  dealing  with 
all  Biblical  questions.  There  is  even  an  antecedent 
probability  that  tradition  will,  to  a  certain  extent, 
be  right,  since  it  has  succeeded  in  establishing 
itself  among  the  accepted  opinions  of  mankind. 
At  any  rate,  it  has  a  claim  to  be  fairly  and  even 
favourably  considered  ;  and  nothing  could  be  more 
unscientific  than  to  fly  oif  from  all  that  has  hitherto 
been  generally  believed  on  any  particular  point, 
and  to  suppose  that  truth  can  be  reached  only  by 
forsaking  traditional  opinions  altogether. 

Now,  it"  humbly  appears  to  me  that  this  tendency  is 
strikingly  illustrated  in  the  lectures  of  Dr.  R.  Smith. 
That  a  belief  is  traditional  seems  almost  to  amount 
with  him  to  a  demonstration  that  it  is  false.  In 
one  passage,  indeed,  "Jewish  tradition"  is  referred 
to  as  "welcome"  along  with  other  facts.^*  But, 
practically,  criticism  and  traditionalism  are  pitted 
against  each  other  throughout  the  entire  volume,  and 
the  former  is  invariably  permitted  to  over-ride  the 
latter.  This  is  not  the  way  to  reach  the  truth ; 
and  I  shall  now  endeavour  to  show,  of  course  very 
briefly,  that  the  tradition  which  ascribes  the  Penta- 
teuch, in  its  substance,  to  Moses,  remains  unshaken, 
notwithstanding  the  elaborate  attack  which  Dr. 
Robertson  Smith  has  made  upon  it,  while  the  view 

*  Old  Tesiamettt,  p.  26. 


30  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

which  he  has  tried  to  substitute  in  its  place  involves 
difficulties  and  improbabilities  of  the  most  formida- 
ble character. 

First,  then,  let  us  consider  the  strength  of  the 
tradition  which  ascribes  the  Pentateuch  to  Moses. 

That  tradition  is  of  the  most  ancient  and  har- 
monious character.  It  has  existed  among  the  Jews 
of  all  ages,  countries,  and  sects  ;  while  it  is  again 
and  again  accredited  by  our  Lord  Himself.  We 
find  it  throughout  the  whole  of  the  Old  Testament, 
as  in  Josh.  viii.  31,  32;  i  Kings  ii.  3;  Ezra  iii.  2; 
Nehem.  viii.  i  ;  Mai.  iv.  4,  etc.  It  is  everywhere 
in  the  Jewish  historian  Josephus  (see  especially 
his  Antiquities^  book  iii.  passim^.  It  is  maintained 
in  all  countries  (see  Acts  xv.  21).  It  is  held  alike 
by  Sadducees  and  Pharisees  (see  Matt.  xxii.  24 ; 
Mark  x.  4,  etc.).  Above  all,  it  is  constantly  referred 
to  by  Christ  as  embodying  an  undoubted  truth. 
Thus  in  John  vii.  19,  He  asks  the  Jews,  "Did  not 
Moses  give  you  the  law  ?  "  and  this  is  only  one  of 
many  passages  in  which  our  Lord  accepts,  and 
argues  upon,  the  Mosaic  authorship  of  the  Penta- 
teuch. Now,  is  all  this  to  be  set  aside,  as  so  much 
worthless  evidence,  in  deference  to  some  difficulties 
called  forth  by  "  criticism  "  at  the  present  day  ?  To 
my  mind  no  difficulty  could  be  so  great  as  that  of 
believing   that   such    an    unbroken   and    powerfully 


THE  PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP,   ETC.      31 

supported  tradition  should  be  baseless.  And,  while 
far  from  seeking  to  hamper  or  overbear  critical 
processes  or  results  by  the  citation  of  mere  autho- 
rity, I  must  acknowledge  that  the  repeated  allusions 
wljich  Christ  makes  to  the  Pentateuch  as  the  work 
of  Moses  impresses  my  mind  with  the  conviction 
that  the  tradition  which  prevailed  to  that  effect 
rested  on  a  foundation  of  fact.  No  one  has  spoken 
in  loftier  or  more  reverent  language  of  our  Lord 
than  has  Dr.  R.  Smith,  and  with  the  views  which  he 
entertains  of  Him  as  the  incarnate  Truth  of  God, 
the  tradition  which  He  so  often  corroborates  as  to 
the  Mosaic  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch  should 
surely  be  regarded  as  comprising  a  genuine  historical 
fact. 

Secondly,  let  us  look  at  the  evidence  which  the  Pen- 
tateuch itself  presents  in  favour  of  its  Mosaic  origin. 

We  turn  to  such  a  chapter  as  Exodus  xxxii.,  and 
there  we  read  (ver.  7 — 10)  the  following  words: 
"And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses,  Go,  get  thee 
down ;  for  thy  people,  which  thou  broughtest  out 
of  the  land  of  Egypt,  have  corrupted  themselves  : 
they  have  turned  aside  quickly  out  of  the  way  which 
I  commanded  them :  they  have  made  them  a  molten 
calf,  and  have  worshipped  it,  and  have  sacrificed 
thereunto,  and  said,  These  be  thy  gods,  O  Israel, 
which   have  brought   thee  up   out   of  the   land   of 


32  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

Egypt.  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses,  I  have 
seen  this  people,  and,  behold,  it  is  a  stiffnecked 
people :  now  therefore  let  me  alone,  that  my  wrath 
may  wax  hot  against  them,  and  that  I  may  consume 
them ;  and  I  will  make  of  thee  a  great  nation." 
And  then  we  read  (ver.  30 — 34),  as  the  sublime 
sequel  to  this  divine  menace,  as  follows  :  **  And  it 
came  to  pass  on  the  morrow,  that  Moses  said  unto 
the  people.  Ye  have  sinned  a  great  sin :  and  now 
I  will  go  up  unto  the  Lord  ;  peradventure  I  shall 
make  an  atonement  for  your  sin.  And  Moses 
returned  unto  the  Lord,  and  said.  Oh,  this  people 
have  sinned  a  great  sin,  and  have  made  them  gods 
of  gold.  Yet  now,  if  Thou  wilt  forgive  their  sin — ; 
and  if  not,  blot  me,  I  pray  Thee,  out  of  Thy  book 
which  Thou  hast  written.  And  the  Lord  said  unto 
Moses,  Whosoever  hath  sinned  against  me,  him 
will  I  blot  out  of  my  book.  Therefore  now  go, 
lead  the  people  unto  the  place  of  which  I  have 
spoken  unto  thee :  behold,  mine  angel  shall  go 
before  thee :  nevertheless  in  the  day  when  I  visit 
I  will  visit  their  sin  upon  them."  Can  any  one 
read  this  passage,  trembling  as  it  is  throughout 
with  personal  feeling,  and  believe  that  it  is  not 
a  record,  at  first  hand,  of  what  actually  occurred, 
but  is  an  invention  of  an  age  a  thousand  years  later 
than  the  period  at  which  the  events  profess  to  have 
occurred  }     Surely,  any  mind  which  can  rest  in  such 


THE  PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP,   ETC.       33 


a  supposition  must  have  been  so  utterly  sophisticated 
with  theories,  as  to  be  unable  to  distinguish  between 
the  genuine  and  the  false.  And  so  in  regard  to 
many  other  portions  of  the  Pentateuch.  It  contains 
narratives,  such  as  that  respecting  Korah,  Dathan, 
and  Abiram,  so  congruous  to  the  circumstances  of 
the  history,  and  descriptions  so  minute,  such  as  the 
details  concerning  the  construction  of  the  tabernacle, 
that,  unless  they  were  written  at  the  time  by  one 
who  was  familiar  with  them,  it  is  necessary  to 
conceive  of  a  creative  genius  almost  superhuman, 
who,  so  late  as  the  days  of  Ezra,  could  project 
himself  into  the  old  desert  life,  and  draw  ideal 
pictures — so  baseless,  yet  so  natural — of  what  then 
took  place  among  the  children  of  Israel  in  the 
wilderness ! 

But,  more  than  this,  Moses  is  in  several  passages 
expressly  declared  to  have  written  down  in  the  desert 
the  injunctions  which  he  received  from  the  lips  of 
Jehovah.  Thus  we  read  in  Exod.  xxxiv.  27,  after 
the  enumeration  of  various  special  precepts,  that 
"the  Lord  said  unto  Moses,  Write  thou  these  words; 
for  after  the  tenor  of  these  words  I  have  made  a 
covenant  with  Israel."  It  almost  appears,  indeed, 
that  there  was  a  well-known  volume  in  which  the 
Jewish  lawgiver  regularly  kept  a  record  of  events  as 
they  occurred.  We  read  in  Exod.  xvii.  14,  that  "the 
Lord  said  unto  Moses,  Write  this  for  a  memorial," 

3 


34  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

not  "  in  a  book,"  as  in  the  English  Authorised  Ver- 
sion, but  *'  in  the  book,"  apparently  referring  to  a 
record  which  Moses  was  understood  to  keep  of 
God's  dealings  with  His  people  in  the  wilderness. 
See  also  Exod.  xxiv.  4,  and  Numb,  xxxiii.  2,  in 
which  Moses  is  expressly  said  to  have  written  "  all 
the  words  of  the  Lord,"  etc. ;  and  compare  such  pas- 
sages as  Lev.  xxvi.  46,  xxvii.  ■  34 ;  in  which,  after 
a  detailed  account  of  various  laws,  the  words  are 
added,  "  These  are  the  commandments  which  the 
Lord  commanded  Moses  for  the  children  of  Israel  in 
Mount  SinaiT  It  does  seem  somewhat  audacious, 
in  the  face  of  all  this,  for  a  writer  at  the  present  day 
to  maintain  that  the  middle  books  of  the  Pentateuch 
had  no  existence  till  the  days  of  Ezra,  and  were  then 
set  forth  by  an  unknown  author  under  the  name  of 
Moses.  Such  a  claim,  if  made,  must  have  refuted 
itself.  The  book  would  have  borne  fabrication  on 
its  very  surface  ;  and,  to  say  nothing  of  the  morality 
of  its  author,  not  the  most  credulous  of  mankind 
could  have  been  persuaded  to  admit  the  pretensions 
which  were  made  in  its  behalf. 

*  Subsidiary,  but  very  substantial,  arguments  for  the 
Mosaic  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch  are  moreover 
to  be  found  in  the  minute  acquaintance  with  Egyptian 
practices  which  it  contains,  and  in  the  aroma  of  the 
desert,  so  to  speak,  which  hangs  around  it.  For  the 
former,  the  reader  may  turn  to  Gen.  xliv.  5,  in  which 


THE  PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP,   ETC.      35 

a  well-known  form  of  Egyptian  divination  is  referred 
to,  or  to  Numb.  xi.  5,  which  mentions  various  kinds 
of  food    specially  used    in  Egypt,  and   many  other 
passages  which  indicate  the  utmost  familiarity  with 
the  products  and  habits  of  Egypt.*   Every  one,  again, 
who  reads  the  Pentateuch  with  unclouded  eye  must 
trace   in   it   proofs  of  the    writer's  familiarity   with 
the  topography  and  phenomena  of  the  desert.     Dr. 
Robertson  Smith,  no  doubt,  affirms  that   the  work 
*'  displays    an    exact    topographical    knowledge    of 
Palestine,  but  by  no  means  so  exact  a  knowledge  of 
the  wilderness  of  the  wandering,"    and   that    "the 
narrative    has   none   of   that    topographical    colour 
which  the  story  of  an  eye-witness  is  sure  to  possess. "f 
But  most  writers,  competent  to  speak  with  authority 
on    the    subject,    have    expressed    a    very   different 
opinion.     Thus,  the  late  Dean  Stanley,  referring  to 
Exod.  xix.  2,  where  we  read  that    **  Israel  camped 
before   the   mount,"    remarks  that,  whatever  theory 
may  be  held  as  to  "  the  mountain  of  the  law,  the 
plain  below  will  still  remain  the  essential  feature  of 
the  view  of  the  Israelite  camp.     That  such  a  plain 
should   exist   at   all   in   front   of  such  a  cliif  is  so 
remarkable  a  coincidence  with  the  sacred  narrative, 
as  to  furnish  a  strong  internal  argument,  not  merely 


*  This  has  been  illustrated  at  great  length  by  many  writers; 
see  especially  Hengstenberg's  Egypt  and  the  Books  of  Moses. 
\  Old  Testament,  etc.,  p.  324. 


36  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

of  its  identity  with  the  scene,  but  of  the  scene  itself 
having  been  described  ly  an  eye-witness T'^"  And  so 
in  regard  to  many  other  particulars.  Now,  such  an 
accurate  acquaintance  with  Egyptian  customs  as  has 
been  indicated,  and  such  exactness  with  reference  to 
the  wilderness,  are  perfectly  natural  when  the  Penta- 
teuch is  regarded  as  having  been  written  by  Moses, 
but  become  little  less  than  miraculous  if  the  work  is 
considered  as  a  product  of  the  times  of  Ezra.  Such 
a  theory  may  safely  be  dismissed  as  incredible. 

I  have  as  yet  made  no  direct  allusion  to  the 
authorship  of  Deuteronomy.  But  I  now  remark  that 
it  is  bound  to  the  other  Pentateuchal  books  by  some 
peculiarities  of  expression  well  known  to  all  Hebrew 
scholars.  Archaic  forms  occur  in  it,  and  the  rest  of 
the  Mosaic  writings,  that  are  found  nowhere  else  in 
the  Hebrew  Bible.  Amid  the  many  revisions  to 
which  the  Pentateuch  was  undoubtedly  subjected,  the 
latest  of  which  took  place  under  Ezra,  there  were 
still  left  in  it  some  antique  and  peculiar  forms  which 
mark  out  the  several  books  as  belonging  to  the  same 
stage  in  the  development  of  the  Hebrew  language, 
or,  in  other  words,  to  the  same  period  in  the  history 
of  the  Israelitish  people.  And  then  the  Book  of 
Deuteronomy  expressly  claims  to  have  been  written 
by  Moses.      Thus   we   read   in   chap.  xxxi.  9,  that 

*  Sinai  and  Palestine i  p.  42. 


THE  PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP,   ETC.      37 

"  Moses  wrote  this  law,"  and  substantially  the  same 
assertion  is  made  in  other  passages.  Now,  whatever 
may  be  thought  of  the  innocence  of  that  "  legal 
fiction  "  of  which  Dr.  R.  Smith  speaks  so  compla- 
cently (p.  385),  it  seems  impossible  to  believe  that  a 
book  like  Deuteronomy,  which  avows  itself  to  be 
the  production  of  Moses,  would  ever  have  obtained 
credit  had  it  first  become  known  only  in  the  days  of 
Josiah.  The  demand  here  again  made  by  "  criti- 
cism "  upon  our  faith  is  so  great  as  to  be  plainly 
inadmissible. 

Thirdly,  it  is  not  correct  to  say  that  there  is  no 
pre-exilic  testimony  in  favour  of  the  Mosaic  aiithorsh, 
of  the  Pentateuch. 

In  a  passage  quoted  above,  Dr.  R.  Smith  tells  us 
respecting  the  Israelitish  prophets,  that  "  they  say 
Jehovah  has  not  enjoined  sacrifice."  He  founds 
the  statement  specially  on  a  passage  in  Jeremiah,  \ 
chap,  vii.,  regarding  which  he  observes  that  *'  the 
position  here  laid  down  is  perfectly  clear."  And 
so  it  must,  no  doubt,  be  considered,  if  we  look  at 
these  words  in  ver.  22  by  themselves,  and  put  a 
literal  construction  upon  them :  ""  For  I  spake  not 
unto  your  fathers,  nor  commanded  them,  in  the 
day  that  I  brought  them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt, 
concerning  burnt  offerings  or  sacrifices."  These 
words   appear   to    negative   as   plainly   as   language 


38  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

can   do  the  Divine  appointment  of  sacrifice  as  set 
forth    in   the   Levitical   legislation.      But  no   one — 
and  far  less  a  scholar  like  Dr.  R.  Smith — needs  to 
be  told  how  dangerous  a  principle  of  interpretation 
it    is   to    isolate   a   few  words  from  the   context  in 
which  they  are  imbedded,  and  then  to  assign  them 
a  rigid  literal  meaning,  without  taking  anything  else 
into  account.     The  most  grotesque  and  even  revolt- 
ing ideas  might  thus  be  attached  to  many  passages 
of  Scripture.     In  the  present  instance,  I  can  only 
express  my  utter  amazement  that  so  acute  and  able 
a  man  as  Dr.  R.  Smith  should  have  allowed  himself 
to  rest  for  one  moment  in  the   explanation   of  the 
passage  which  he  has  suggested.     That  he  has  done 
so    can,   I    believe,  only  be   accounted    for   by   the 
seeming  support  which,   when  read   superficially,   it 
gives  to  that  theory  of  the  Levitical  laws  which  he 
has  adopted.*     For,   let  us  read  the  passage  with 
its  context,  and  the  meaning  of  it  will  be  perfectly 
clear.     It  stands   as  follows   (vv.   21 — 24):    "Thus 
saith   the   Lord   of  hosts,   the  God  of  Israel ;    Put 
your   burnt  offerings   unto   your  sacrifices,   and  eat 
flesh ;  for  I  spake  not  unto  your  fathers,  nor  com- 

*  It  may  be  noticed  that  in  his  exegesis  of  this  passage,  as  in 
so  many  other  respects,  Dr,  R.  Smith  has  followed  Professor 
Wellhausen.  That  author  infers  from  the  words  in  question 
that  Jeremiah  knew  nothing  of  the  Levitical  code  as  having 
been  given  thiongh  Moses.  —  Geschichtc  Israels,  i.  61. 


THE  PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP,   ETC.       39 

manded  them,  in  the  day  that  I  brought  them  out 
of  the  land  of  Egypt,  concerning  burnt  offerings  or 
sacrifices  ;  but  this  thing  commanded  I  them,  say- 
ing, Obey  my  voice,  and  I  will  be  your  God,  and  ye 
shall  be  my  people ;  and  walk  ye  in  all  the  ways  that 
I  have  commanded  you,  that  it  may  be  well  unto 
you.  But  they  hearkened  not,  nor  inclined  their 
ear,  but  walked  in  the  counsels  and  in  the  imagina- 
tion of  their  evil  heart,  and  went  backward,  and  not 
forward."  Is  it  not  obvious  to  every  one,  on  reading 
over  these  words,  that  the  great  principle  which  they 
involve  is  just  that  laid  down  so  tersely  in  another 
part  of  the  Old  Testament  (i  Sam.  xv.  22),  '*  To 
obey  is  better  than  sacrifice,  and  to  hearken  than 
the  fat  of  rams "  ?  Mere  ritual  was  as  nothing  in 
comparison  with  the  moral  and  spiritual  character 
of  the  worshipper.  This  is  constantly  set  forth  both 
in  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  Thus  we  read  in 
Hosea  vi.  6,  "  I  desired  mercy,  and  not  sacrifice,  and 
the  knowledge  of  God  more  thajt  burnt  offerings," 
Compare  the  use  of  this  text  made  by  our  Lord  in 
Matt.  ix.  13,  xii.  7,  and  see  a  similar  form  of  ex- 
pression in  Ps.  xl.  6,  li.  16,  17,  etc.  The  obvious 
meaning  of  the  passage  in  Jeremiah  is,  that,  while 
the  Israelites  continued  to  disobey  God  in  heart  and 
life,  it  was  utterly  vain  for  them  to  seek  His  favour  by 
the  presentation  of  sacrifices  of  any  sort  whatever. 
The  prophet  indignantly  tells  them  to  take  even  the 


40  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

Burnt  offerings  which  used  to  be  wholly  consumed 
upon  the  altar,  and  add  them  to  the  peace  offerings, 
part  of  which  properly  belonged  to  themselves. 
They  would  thus,  at  least,  not  altogether  throw 
away  their  sacrifices,  but  would,  by  not  offering 
them  to  God,  be  able  to  gratify  their  own  sensual 
propensities  in  connection  with  them.  All  the 
offerings  of  whatever  kind  presented  to  God  were, 
when  viewed  by  themselves,  only  like  the  "  mint, 
anise,  and  cummin"  referred  to  by  our  Lord  in 
Matt,  xxiii.  23;  and  *'the  weightier  matters  of  the 
law"  have  always  been  "judgment,  mercy,  and 
faith ; "  but,  adds  Christ,  in  language  exactly  appli- 
cable to  the  point  before  us,  "  These  ought  ye  to 
have  done,  and  not  to  leave  the  other  undone.'* 
It  is  obvious  that  the  words  of  Jeremiah,  instead 
of  implying  that  the  Israelites  of  his  day  were  not 
acquainted  with  the  Levitical  enactments,  would 
have  had  no  point  whatever,  unless  the  men  whom 
he  addressed  had  been  perfectly  familiar  with  the 
various  kinds  of  sacrifices  to  which  he  refers.  And 
thus  the  passage  on  which  Dr.  R.  Smith  builds  so 
much  not  only  fails  to  yield  him  support,  but  proves 
the  very  opposite  of  what  he  maintains.* 

*  I  have  dwelt  at  some  length  upon  this  passage,  because 
Dr.  R.  Smith  appears  to  attach  to  it  special  importance.  Again 
and  again  he  refers  to  Jer.  vii.  22,  and,  on  the  ground  of  that 
verse,  says  that  "Jeremiah  denies  in  express  terms  that  a  law 


THE  PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP,   ETC.       41 

There  are  many  texts  and  narratives  of  Scripture 
which  might  be  quoted  to  show  that  the  Levitical 
law  was  known  among  the  Israelites  before  the  exile. 
But  I  must  be  satisfied  with  simply  referring  to  the 
following  passages  for  comparison  with  each  other  : 
Hosea  xii.  4,  with  Gen.  xxxii.  24 ;  Joel  ii.  2,  with 
Exod.  X.  14;  Amos  v.  17,  with  Exod.  xii.  12  ;  i  Kings 
XX.  42,  with  Lev.  xxvii.  29  ;  2  Kings  vii.  3,  with  Lev. 
xiii.  46,  and  Numb.  v.  3,  etc.* 

On  considering  such  passages,  well  may  it  be  said 
that,  "beyond  all  doubt,  there  are  numerous  most 
striking  references  both  in  the  Prophets  and  in  the 
Books  of  Kings  to  passages  which  are  found  in  our 
present  Pentateuch.     One  thing  at  least  is  certain, 


of  sacrifice  forms  any  part  of  the  Divine  commands  to  Israel " 
(p.  372;  comp.  pp.  117,  263,  370).  How  utterly  baseless  is 
such  an  assertion  has,  I  trust,  been  sufficiently  shown  above. 

*  A  great  number  of  additional  texts  are  quoted  for  compa- 
rison in  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  art.  Pentateuch,  and  in 
Hengstenberg's  Authenticity  of  the  Pentateuch,  though  it  must 
be  admitted  that  some  of  them  are  far  from  conclusive.  The 
following  are  the  suggestive  words  of  a  man  who  had  no  pre- 
tensions to  be  regarded  as  a  scholar  in  the  technical  sense  of  the 
word,  but  who  was  possessed  of  a  very  shrewd  intellect,  as  well 
as  a  very  lofty  genius.  Commenting  on  I  Kings  ii.  3,  Dr. 
Chalmers  remarks,  "  One  feels  interested  by  his  (David's) 
reference  to  the  law  of  Moses — that  law  which,  as  appears  in  the 
Psalms,  was  the  frequent  study  and  meditation  of  this  great 
monarch."  This  one  text,  and  the  reflections  it  suggests,  are,  in 
fact,  conclusive. 


42  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION, 

that  the  theory  of  men  like  Von  Bohlen,  Vatke,  and 
others,  who  suppose  the  Pentateuch  to  have  been 
written  in  the  times  of  the  latest  kings,  is  utterly 
absurd."  *  If  this  be  so,  one  cannot  but  deeply  regret 
that  tone  of  dogmatism  by  which  Dr.  R.  Smith's 
interesting  volumes  are  disfigured.  He  speaks  in 
one  passage  of  "the  demonstration"  which  has  of 
late  been  given  "that  the  priestly  legislation  did 
not  exist  before  the  exile."  t  But,  happily,  the 
demonstrations  of  "  criticism  "  are  not  quite  so  stable 
as  are  those  of  Euclid.  Only  a  generation  ago,  it 
was  supposed  to  have  been  demonstrated  that  our 
first  Gospel  is  a  translated,  and  not  an  original  work. 
But  what  scholar  of  any  eminence  now  maintains 
that  opinion  }  In  like  manner,  the  "  critics  "  not  so 
long  ago  maintained  that  our  third  Gospel  was  built 
upon  that  of  the  heretical  Marcion  who  flourished  in 
the  second  quarter  of  the  second  century.  But  that 
view  also  has  become  thoroughly  discredited,  and 
Marcion's  Gospel  is  now  universally  admitted  to 
have  been  a  mutilated  copy  of  that  of  St.  Luke. 
And  so,  I  believe,  will  it  be  with  the  question  we 
have  been  considering.  Further  inquiry  will  dissi- 
pate the  views  which  now  prevail  among  the  so- 
called  critics,  and  will  prove  that  the  Pentateuch,  as 


*  Smith's  Dictionary,  ii.  p.  780. 
The  Prophets  of  Israel,  p.  xi 


THE  PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP,   ETC.      43 

we  now  possess  it,  is  to  be  traced,  in  substance,  to 
the  legislator,  Moses. 

I  say,  in  substance,  for  that  slight  additions  have 
been  naade  to  it  since  his  day  is  unquestionable. 
It  was  always,  of  course,  admitted  that  the  last 
chapter  of  Deuteronomy,  which  contains  an  account 
of  the  death  of  Moses,  had  been  written  by  another 
hand.  But  several  other  obvious  interpolations  may 
be  detected.  We  ought  to  remember  that  the  Penta- 
teuch must  have  been  subjected  to  many  redactions 
before  receiving  its  final  shape  in  the  times  of  Ezra ; 
and  on  these  occasions  various  notes  and  explana- 
tions seem  to  have  been  inserted  in  the  text.  Among 
these  are  to  be  reckoned  the  following :  Gen.  xii.  6, 
xiii.  7,  "And  the  Canaanite  and  the  Perizzite 
dwelled  then  in  the  land,"  with  Gen.  xxxvi.  31, 
"These  are  the  kings  that  reigned  in  the  land  of 
Edom,  before  there  reigned  any  king  over  the  land 
of  Israel."  And  such  a  passage  as  Numb.  xii.  3, 
**  Now  the  man  Moses  was  very  meek,  above  all  the 
men  which  were  upon  the  face  of  the  earth,"  should 
at  once  be  granted  to  have  been  a  marginal  note 
which  has  slipped  into  the  text.  It  is  impossible  to 
conceive  of  Moses  as  writing  of  himself  in  such 
terms,  but  nothing  is  more  natural  than  that  a  note 
of  the  kind  should  have  been  made  by  an  editor  or 
transcriber,  and  that  this  note  should,  in  course  of 
time,  have  found  its  way  into  the  narrative  itself. 


44  OLD    lESTAMENT  REVISION. 

We  know  that  this  has  happened  in  several  cases, 
with  respect  to  the  manuscripts  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. Such  is  the  explanation,  probably,  to  be  given 
of  the  insertion  of  the  doxology  of  the  Lord's  Prayer, 
Matt.  vi.  13;  of  the  statement  as  to  the  angel  which 
is  found  in  John  v.  3,  4;  and  of  the  ecclesiastical 
formula  which  appears  in  Acts  viii.  37.  So  in  regard 
to  the  Old  Testament.  There  is  no  difficulty  in 
conceiving  that  slight  but  significant  interpolations 
of  the  kind  referred  to  should,  in  course  of  ages, 
have  been  introduced  into  the  Mosaic  narrative ; 
while  nevertheless  the  Pentateuch,  as  a  whole,  must 
be  ascribed  to  the  immediate  authorship  of  the  great 
lawgiver  of  Israel.* 

*  An  acute  remark  of  Astruc,  the  celebrated  Belgian  phy- 
sician, who  was  the  first  in  modern  times  to  suggest  the  docu- 
mentary hypothesis  as  to  the  origin  of  Genesis,  is  worth  referring 
to  in  this  place.  In  his  "  Conjectures,"  published  in  1753,  ^^ 
observes  that  "  Moses  always  speaks  in  Genesis  as  a  simple 
historian,  and  never  says  that  any  part  of  his  narrative  has  been 
conveyed  to  him  by  inspiration."  He  proceeds  to  notice  that  it 
is  otherwise  in  the  remaining  books  of  the  Pentateuch.  On  this 
Dr.  R.  Smith  justly  remarks  (p.  419),  "When  ^  is  admitted 
that  the  Bible  histoiyis  based  upon  written  sources,  oral  testi- 
mony, and  personal  observation,  no  theory  of  inspiration  can 
alter  the  principle  that  the  knowledge  of  the  writers  was  hmited 
by  their  sources." 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  PENTATEUCH.— CORRECTIONS  OF   THE 
AUTHORISED  ENGLISH  VERSION. 

I  NOW  proceed  to  direct  attention  to  some 
amendments  which  require  to  be  made  on  the 
Authorised  English  Version  of  the  Pentateuch. 
Passing  over  multitudes  of  slight  improvements 
which  are  called  for,  only  those  which  seem  of  great 
or  considerable  importance  will  here  be  noticed. 

Gen.  ii.  4,  5,  stands  in  our  common  version  as 
follows  : — "  These  are  the  generations  of  the  heaven 
and  of  the  earth  when  they  were  created,  in  the  day 
that  the  Lord  God  made  the  earth  and  the  heavens, 
and  every  plant  of  the  field  before  it  was  in  the 
earth,  and  every  herb  of  the  field  before  it  grew : 
for  the  Lord  God  had  not  caused  it  to  rain  upon 
the  earth,  and  there  was  not  a  man  to  till  the 
ground."  Every  reader  must  feel  the  awkwardness 
of  this  statement ;  but  the  true  rendering  completely 
escapes  from  it,  and  is  as  follows  : — **  These  are  the 
generations"  (or  "This  is  the   history")   '*of  the 


46  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

heavens  and  of  the  earth  when  they  were  created, 
in  the  day  that  the  Lord  God  made  the  earth  and 
the  heavens.  And  no  plant  of  the  field  was  yet  in 
the  earth,  and  no  herb  of  the  field  had  yet  sprung 
up ;  for  the  Lord  God  had  not  caused  it  to  rain 
upon  the  earth,  and  there  was  not  a  man  to  till  the 
ground." 

Gen.  xii.  6,  xiii.  i8,  xiv.  13,  xviii.  i.  The  Hebrew 
word  rendered  in  all  these  passages  "plain"  (or 
"plains")  should  in  each  case  be  translated  oak,  or 
oak-groves,  though  some  Hebraists  think  that  the 
term  employed  denotes  a  terebinth,  and  others  that 
it  simply  means  a  large  forest  tree.  Nothing  can  be 
said  ^s  to  the  signification  of  the  word  "  Moreh." 

Gen.  xii.  9.  In  this  verse  it  would  be  preferable 
that  the  expression  "  south  "  should  be  printed  with 
an  initial  capital  letter,  as  indicating  Abram's  ap- 
proach to  a  well-known  and  definite  region  called 
"the  South."  The  same  remark  applies  to  many 
other  passages. 

Gen.  xxviii.  20 — 22.  These  verses  stand  as  follows 
in  the  Authorised  Version: — "And  Jacob  vowed  a 
vow,  saying.  If  God  will  be  with  me,  and  will  keep 
me  in  this  way  that  I  go,  and  will  give  me  bread  to 
eat,  and  raiment  to  put  on,  so  that  I  come  again  to 
my  father's  house  in  peace  ;  then  shall  the  Lord  be 
my  God  ;  and  this  stone,  which  I  have  set  for  a 
pillar,  shall  be  God's  house ;   and  of  all  that  Thou 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.      47 

shall  give  me,  I  will  surely  give  the  tenth  unto  Thee." 
By  this  translation,  the  construction  is  made  to 
change  in  the  middle  of  ver.  21,  but  such  is  not 
the  case  in  the  original.  The  Hebrew  does  not 
adopt  the  future  tense  till  the  first  clause  of  ver.  22 
is  reached,  and  the  better  rendering  therefore  is, 
"  If  God  will  be  with  me,  and  will  keep  me  in  this 
way  that  I  go,  and  will  give  me  bread  to  eat,  and 
raiment  to  put  on,  and  if  I  come  again  to  my  father's 
house  in  peace,  and  if  the  Lord  will  be  my  God, 
then  shall  this  stone,  which  I  have  set  for  a  pillar, 
be  the  house  of  God,  and  of  all  that  Thou  hast  given 
me,  I  will  surely  give  a  tenth  unto  Thee."  * 

Gen.  xxxi.  19,  34,  35.  The  Hebrew  word  which 
is  in  these  verses  translated  ** images"  would  perhaps 
better  be  left  in  its  original  form,  "Teraphim."  The 
reference  is  to  images  in  the  human  form,  large  or 
small,  which  seem  to  have  been  made  use  of  for 
the  purposes  of  divination.  They  may  have  been 
analogous  to  the  ** images"  of  ancestors  so  much 
revered  among  the  Romans.  At  any  rate,  they  im- 
plied an  early  form  of  superstition  bordering  on 
idolatry,  and,  as  doing  so,  are  condemned  in  several 

*  The  above  change  is  approved  of  in  "The  Speaker's  Com- 
mentary," but  is  not  accepted  by  De  Wette.  I  have  throughout 
this  chapter  consulted  these  two  important  authorities,  without, 
however,  being  always  able  to  agree  with  either. 


48  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

passages  of  Scripture.     (See  i  Sam.  xv.  23  ;  2  Kings 
xxiii.  24.) 

Gen.  xxxvi.  24.  The  words  which  are  in  this 
verse  rendered  "  Anah  that  found  the  mules  in  the 
wilderness,"  ought  to  be  translated  *'Anah  that 
found  the  hot  spriJtgs  in  the  wilderness."  The  word 
does  not  occur  anywhere  else  in  the  Old  Testament. 

Gen.  xxxvii.  28,  xxxix.  i.  In  these  verses  we 
find  the  absurd  form  "  Ishmeelites,"  instead  of  the 
usual  and  correct  form  *'  Ishmaelites,"  met  with  in 
almost  every  other  part  of  Scripture.  Many  readers 
have  doubtless  puzzled  themselves  with  the  two 
different  forms  of  the  same  word ;  and  it  is  evident 
that  such  unmeaning  and  perplexing  diversity  can 
in  no  way  whatever  be  justified. 

Gen.  xlix.  10.  This  is  a  very  difficult  passage,  and 
widely  different  views  have  been  held  as  to  its  mean- 
ing. The  reason  of  this  diversity  of  opinion  is 
chiefly  to  be  found  in  the  word  Shiloh,  which  occurs 
in  the  verse.  Is  that  word  subject  or  object  ?  is  it 
the  name  of  a  place,  or  the  designation  of  a  person  ? 
and,  if  the  latter,  how  should  it  be  translated  ?  After 
the  most  careful  consideration,  I  believe  the  verse 
should  be  rendered  as  follows:  "The  sceptre  shall 
not  depart  from  Judah,  nor  a  lawgiver  from  be- 
tween his  feet,  until  (He  who  is)  Peace  comes,  and 
unto  Him  shall  be  the  obedience  of  nations."  Of 
course,  this  rendering  implies  that  the   verse  has  a 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.      49 

Messianic  reference ;  and  that,  of  itself,  is  sufficient 
to  discredit  it  in  the  estimation  of  a  certain  class 
of  scholars.  I  am  afraid  it  must  be  said  that  the 
self-styled  "  critical "  school  of  interpreters  is  dis- 
tinguished by  a  tendency  always,  if  possible,  to  set 
aside  any  reference  in  Old  Testament  passages  to 
a  coming  Messiah.  But  why  should  this  be  so  ? 
What  is  the  Old  Testament  without  its  Christology  ? 
It  then  sinks  into  a  series  of  comparatively  unin- 
teresting and  unimportant  narratives,  which  can  be 
regarded  as  but  of  little  value  to  us  at  the  present 
day.  But  let  it  have  Christ  in  view  throughout,  let 
references  to  a  personal  Messiah  be  seen  imbedded 
in  its  announcements,  and  it  then  becomes  part  of 
a  grand  living  organism,  instinct  from  beginning  to 
end  with  the  revelation  of  God's  grace  to  the  chil- 
dren of  men.  The  Bible  in  its  many  parts,  and  with 
its  manifold  varieties  of  teaching,  is  thus  felt,  in  a 
spiritual  sense,  to  be  but  one  book.  Christ  first  as 
coming,  and  then  as  come,  gives  a  unity  to  the  whole 
of  revelation,  and  imparts  a  dignity  worthy  of  God 
to  every  portion  of  Scripture.  So  far,  then,  from 
there  being  any  objection  to  the  interpretation  which 
is  off"ered  of  an  Old  Testament  passage,  in  the  fact 
that  it  implies  a  reference  to  the  Messiah,  that  is  rather 
a  recommendation  of  the  explanation  suggested, 
provided  it  does  no  violence  to  the  proper  lexical 
and  grammatical  meaning  of  the  words.     And  here 

4 


50 


OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 


I  cannot  but  remark   on   the   appropriation  of  the 
title  **  critical,"  as  peculiarly  or  exclusively  applicable 
to  those  who  set  themselves  against  opinions  which 
have  hitherto  been  generally  accepted.     For    what 
is  criticism  ?     Is  it  not  the  ascertainment  of  truth  ? 
And  who  has  any  right  to  say  that  views  which  have 
been   entertained   for  ages  are  not  true,  until  they 
have  been  shown  to  be  false  ?     Let  all  that  can  be 
proved  to  be  unfounded  or  capricious  in  the  tradi- 
tional teaching  of  the  Church  be  unhesitatingly  set 
aside ;  but  let  not  the  utterly  unscientific  principle 
be  adopted,  that  an  opinion  must  be  erroneous  simply 
because  it  has  prevailed  through  many  generations, 
and  because  it  still  commends  itself  to  those  who 
believe  that  truth  is  old  as  well  as  new,  and  who  are 
anxious  to  embrace  the  truth,  whatever  may  be  the 
nature  of  the  claims  by  which  it  is  urged  on  their 
consideration  and  acceptance. 

Exod.  ii.  II,  12.  These  verses  run  as  follows  in 
our  common  English  translation  : — ''And  it  came  to 
pass  in  those  days,  when  Moses  was  grown,  that 
he  went  out  unto  his  brethren,  and  looked  on  their 
burdens;  and  he  spied  an  Egyptian  smiting  an 
Hebrew,  one  of  his  brethren.  And  he  looked  this 
way  and  that  way,  and  when  he  saw  that  there  was 
no  man,  he  slew  the  Egyptian,  and  hid  him  in  the 
sand."     Here  comes  out  one  of  the  most  character- 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.      51 

istic  blemishes  of  the  Authorised  Version — its  need- 
less and  misleading  variations  in  the  rendering  of 
terms  which  are  exactly  the  same  in  the  original. 
The  verb  translated  '*  smiting "  in  the  first  of  the 
two  verses  quoted  above,  and  *'  slew  "  in  the  second, 
is  in  both  cases  the  same  in  the  Hebrew ;  and  a 
uniformity  of  rendering  ought  manifestly  to  be 
preserved. 

Exod.  iii.  22,  xi.  2,  xii.  35,  36.  It  is  the 
general  opinion  of  Hebrew  scholars  that  the  word 
translated  '*  borrow "  in  the  first  three  of  these 
passages  would  be  more  correctly  rendered  "ask;" 
and  that,  correspondingly,  the  word  translated 
**  lent,"  in  the  last  passage,  should  be  simply 
rendered  "gave."  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  ask 
and  give  are  the  usual  meanings  of  the  Hebrew 
words,  and  by  adopting  these  renderings  here,  as 
in  other  passages  of  the  Old  Testament,  a  seeming 
want  of  straightforwardness,  which  exists  in  the 
narrative  as  it  stands,  no  longer  suggests  itself  to 
the  mind  of  the  reader. 

Exod.  ix.  5.  This  verse  stands  in  our  common 
version  as  follows : — '*  For  now  I  will  stretch  out  my 
hand,  that  I  may  smite  thee  and  thy  people  with 
pestilence  ;  and  thou  shalt  be  cut  off  from  the 
earth."  But  it  is  evident  that  such  a  translation  does 
not  cohere  with  the  context  either  before  or  after ; 
and  most  Hebraists  agree  that  the  more  correct  ren- 


52  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

dering  is,  "  For  now,  had  I  stretched  forth  my  hand, 
and  smitten  thee  and  thy  people  with  the  pestilence, 
then  hadst  thou  been  cut  off  from  the  earth." 

Exod.  ix.  31.  "And  the  flax  and  the  barley  was 
smitten  :  for  the  barley  was  in  the  ear,  and  the  flax 
was  boiled."  Probably  few  modern  readers  could 
quite  at  once  explain  this  last  clause  as  meaning  that 
"  the  flax  was  in  blossom^  And  this  leads  me  to 
remark  that  the  many  other  obsolete  terms  which 
occur  in  the  Old  Testament  should,  of  course,  be 
exchanged  for  language  which  is  intelligible  at  the 
present  day.  Among  these  are  to  be  reckoned  such 
expressions  as  the  following  :  ouches,  earing,  brigan- 
dine,  all  to  (for  "  altogether "),  delicates,  bravery 
(Isa.  iii.  18,  in  the  sense  of  the  Scotch  "braws"), 
vagabond  (for  "wanderer"),  noisome  (for  "noxious") 
scrabbled,  minish,  undersetters,  and  many  others,  more 
of  which  will  be  found  noticed  in  the  concluding 
chapter  of  this  work. 

JSxod.  xxxiv.  13.  Here  we  find  the  following  in 
our  English  translation: — "But  ye  shall  destroy  their 
altars,  break  their  images,  and  cut  down  their 
groves."  The  rendering  "  groves,"  which  occurs 
in  this  verse,  and  in  many  other  passages,  is  quite 
erroneous.  The  Hebrew  word  made  use  of  {asherim) 
always  denotes  either  a  heathen  goddess  or  images 
intended  to  represent  her.  In  this  passage  "images" 
must  be  meant,  while  in  i  Kings  xv.  13,  the  goddess 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.      53 

herself  must  be  referred  to,  but  the  word  *'  grove " 
is  never  an  appropriate  rendering  of  the  original. 
(See  afterwards  on  Deut.  vii.  5.) 

Exod.  xxxiv.  33.  In  this  verse  the  Authorised  \. 
English  Version  is  altogether  erroneous  and  mis- 
leading. It  stands  thus  :  "And  ////  Moses  had  done 
speaking  with  them,  he  put  a  veil  on  his  face." 
This  word  "till"  is  quite  an  improper  supplement. 
It  should  be  when,  as  the  Septuagint  and  other 
ancient  versions  show,  and  as  the  reasoning  of  St. 
Paul  on  the  passage  (2  Cor.  iii.  13,  seq.')  demands. 
The  common  belief  is,  that  when  Moses  spoke  to  the 
people,  he  had  the  veil  upon  his  face.  But  not  so : 
"  he  spoke  to  them  without  the  veil,  with  his  face 
shining  and  glorified  ;  when  he  ceased  speaking  to 
them,  he  put  on  the  veil ;  but  whensoever  he  went 
in  before  the  Lord  to  speak  to  Him,  the  veil  was 
removed  till  he  came  out,  and  had  spoken  to  the 
Israelites  all  that  the  Lord  had  commanded  him. 
during  which  speaking  they  saw  that  his  face  shone, 
and  after  which  speaking  he  again  put  on  the  veil. 
So  that  the  veil  was  the  symbol  of  concealment  and 
transitoriness :  the  part  revealed  they  might  see, 
beyond  that  they  could  not:  the  ministry  was  a 
broken,  interrupted  one  ;  its  end  was  wrapped  in 
obscurity."  *     The  verse  before  us,  then,  should  be 

*  Alford  on  2  Cor.  13.  seq. 


54  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

rendered — "And   when   Moses   had    done    speaking 
with  them,  he  put  a  veil  on  his  face." 

Lev.  V.  1 6,  vi.  21,  viii.  15,  etc.  The  point  in 
common  to  these  verses,  as  they  stand  in  the 
Authorised  Version,  is  that  they  needlessly  introduce 
varieties  of  rendering  as  regards  certain  Hebrew 
words.  In  v.  16,  "harm"  is  substituted  for  "sin," 
which  is  the  translation  adopted  everywhere  else 
throughout  the  book;  in  vi.  21,  a  very  uncommon 
Hebrew  expression  is  translated  "  baken,"  while  in 
vii.  12  the  same  word  is  rendered  "fried;"  and  in 
viii.  15  we  find  "to  make  reconciliation"  for  "to 
atone,"  which  is  the  translation  of  the  word  given 
in  almost  every  other  passage.  It  is  obvious  that 
such  capricious  varieties  of  rendering  are  fitted  only 
to  bewilder  and  mislead  the  English  reader. 

Lev.  xvi.  8.  We  here  read  in  the  Authorised 
Version,  "  And  Aaron  shall  cast  lots  upon  the  two 
goats :  one  lot  for  the  Lord,  and  the  other  lot  for 
the  scape-goat."  The  word  azazel,  here  translated 
"  scape-goat,"  has  given  rise  to  very  various  inter- 
pretations. The  two  forms  of  expression,  "  for  the 
Lord,"  and  "for  azazel,"  are  exactly  the  same  in 
the  original,  so  that  we  can  hardly  understand  the 
latter  as  literally  referring  to  the  goat  itself.  What 
view,  then,  is  to  be  adopted  as  to  its  meaning  }  In 
answer    to   this    question,    the    following    judicious 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.      55 

remarks  seem  to  me  worthy  of  quotation : — *'  May 
it  not  be  supposed  that  the  word  azazel  was  some- 
what  vague   and    indeterminate  in   its  signification 
to  the  ancient  Israelites  themselves,  just  as  redemp- 
tion  is   to   the    Christian  ?      So   far   as   our    sinful 
condition  is  concerned,  nothing  can   be  plainer   or 
more   vitally  important;  but   when   the  question   is 
*asked,    '  To   whom   is   this   redemption   paid  ? '   no 
certain  and    satisfactory   answer   has   been,  or   can 
be,  given.     May  it  not  have  been  in  the  same  way 
with   this   word  to  the   Israelites  ?     That  their  sins 
were   borne    away   was    most    clearly   taught ;    but 
looking   upon  these  sins   as   concrete  realities,  the 
question  might  arise,    *  Whither  were  they  carried  ? ' 
The  answer  is,  in  the  first  place,  to  the  wilderness, 
*  to  the  place  of  banishment  from  God ; '  and  then 
further  to    azazel.     It   was   not   necessary  that   the 
word    should   be    clearly   understood ;    in    fact,    the 
more    vague    its    meaning,    the    more    perfect    the 
symbolism."  ^^     In  these  circumstances,  perhaps  the 
best  way  to  deal  with  the  term  is  simply  to  leave  it 
untranslated,  as  has  been  done  by  many  interpreters, 
ancient  and  modern,  and  so  to  read  the  verse  thus : 
*'  And  Aaron  shall  cast  lots  upon  the  two  goats,  one 
lot  for  Jehovah,  and  the  other  lot  for  azazel." 


*  Dr.    F.  Gardiner  in  Lange's   Commentary^    edited  by  Dr. 
SchafF,  vol.  ii.  in  loc. 


S6  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

Lev.  xviii.  i8.  This  verse  has  been  the  subject  of 
much  controversy  in  connection  with  the  question 
of  the  lawfuhiess  of  marriage  with  a  deceased  wife's 
sister.  The  authorised  English  translation  is  fairly 
correct,  but  may  perhaps  be  slightly  improved  as 
follows : — *'  Neither  shalt  thou  take  a  wife  to  her 
sister,  to  provoke  her  to  jealousy,  ...  in  addition 
to  her,  during  her  lifetime."  The  alternative  ren- 
dering found  on  the  margin  of  our  English  Bibles 
— *'one  wife  to  another" — as  if  polygamy  were  the 
thing  forbidden,  is,  I  think,  wholly  inadmissible.* 
Two  sisters,  in  the  literal  sense  of  the  words,  are 
unquestionably  referred  to,  and  polygamy  being 
apparently  for  the  time  conceded  (comp.  Matt. 
xix.  8),  the  prohibition  is  to  this  effect,  that  two 
sisters  shall  not  simultaneously  be  the  wives  of  one 
man.  The  seemliness  as  well  as  expediency  of 
such  an  enactment  is  clear ;  but  it  obviously  leaves 
the  question  open  as  to  marriage  with  the  sister  of  * 
a  wife  who  is  dead ;  or  rather,  by  the  emphasis 
which  it   puts  on   the  words  "  in  her   lifetime,"   it 

*  Prof.  Lagarde,  indeed,  in  a  recent  brochure,  thinks  that 
there  is  in  the  verse  a  reference  to  polygamy.  He  argues  that 
the  Hebrew  word  rendered  in  our  version,  "  to  vex  her,"  should 
be  translated  a  "  fellow- wife  ; "  but  it  is  difficult  to  believe,  ia 
view  of  the  subsequent  Biblical  history,  that  the  verse  contains 
a  prohibition  of  polygamy.  In  that  case,  however,  it  will  simply 
have  no  bearing  whatever  on  the  question  of  marriage  with  a 
deceased  wife's  sister. 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.     57 

implicitly  sanctions  such  marriages  as  perfectly  law- 
ful. This  must,  I  humbly  think,  be  manifest  to  every 
one  who  looks  at  the  passage  with  an  unbiassed 
judgment ;  and  it  is  simply  a  matter  of  regret  and 
reproach,  that  English  law  has  not  yet  acknowledged 
the  validity  of  the  marriages  in  question,  while  so 
much  suffering  and  sorrow  have  followed  in  con- 
sequence. 

Numb.  xiv.  21 — 23.  More  than  one  mistake  occurs 
in  the  rendering  of  these  verses,  as  they  stand  in 
our  authorised  translation.  They  should  be  cor- 
rected as  follows : — '*  But  as  truly  as  I  live,  and  all 
the  earth  shall  be  filled  with  the  glory  of  the  Lord, 
all  those  men  who  have  seen  my  glory,  and  my 
miracles  which  I  did  in  Egypt  and  in  the  wilder- 
ness, and  have  tempted  me  now  these  ten  times, 
and  have  not  hearkened  to  my  voice,  shall  not  see 
the  land  which  I  sware  unto  their  fathers  :  all  who 
have  rejected  me  shall  not  see  it." 

Numb,  xxiii.  18 — 24.  The  magnificent  poetical 
outbursts  contained  in  the  narrative  respecting 
Balaam  (chap.  xxii.  2 — xxiv.  25)  all  admit  of  being 
more  correctly  rendered  than  in  our  common  version. 
The  first  of  them  (chap,  xxiii.  7 — 10)  has  already 
been  given  in  an  amended  form,  as  an  example  of 
parallelism,  in  chapter  i.  We  have  now  to  look 
at  Balaam's  second  utterance,   and  we  find  that  it 


58  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

requires  to  be   corrected   in   English  somewhat   to 
the  following  effect : — 

1 8.  "  Rise  up,  Balak,  and  hear  ; 

Hearken  unto  me,  O  son  of  Zippor. 

19.  God  is  not  a  man,  that  He  should  lie  ; 
Neither  a  son  of  man,  that  He  should  repent. 
Hath  He  said,  and  shall  He  not  do  it  ? 
And  spoken,  and  shall  He  not  make  it  good  ? 

20.  Behold,  I  have  received  [an  inspiration]  to  bless^ 
And  He  hath  blessed,  and  I  cannot  reverse  it. 

21.  He  hath  not  beheld  iniquity  in  Jacob, 
Neither  hath  He  seen  misery  in  Israel ; 
The  Lord  his  God  is  with  him,- 

And  the  shout  of  a  king  is  in  his  midst. 

22.  God  brought  them  forth  out  of  Egypt  \ 

He  hath,  as  it  were,  the  strength  of  an  urus. 

23.  Surely  there  is  no  enchantment  against  Jacob, 
And  there  is  no  divination  against  Israel. 

In  due  time  it  shall  be  told  to  Jacob  and  Israel  what  God 
doeth. 

24.  Behold,  the  people  shall  rise  up  as  a  great  lion, 
And  lift  up  himself  as  a  young  lion  : 

He  shall  not  lie  down  till  he  eat  of  the  prey, 
And  drink  the  blood  of  the  slain." 

The  meaning  of  ver.  21  has  often  been  mis- 
taken. As  frequently  happens,  there  is  a  slight 
deviation  in  the  second  branch  of  the  parallel  from 
the  meaning  of  the  first,  but  here  with  strict  logical 
precision.  God  beheld  not  iniquity  in  Jacob — 
viewing  them,  not  as  individuals,  but  in  their 
corporate  capacity  as  in  covenant  with  Him  ;  and 
therefore  neither  did  He  see  misery  in  Israel — there 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.     59 

was  no  sufifering,  because  there  was  no  sin.  The 
rendering  ''unicorn"  in  ver.  22  is  a  very  unfortunate 
one.  It  is  taken  literally  from  the  Septuagint 
version,  which  here  suggests  quite  an  erroneous 
conception  of  the  meaning.  The  reference  is  pro- 
bably to  a  sort  of  gigantic  wild  ox,  well  known  to 
the  ancients,  although  now  apparently  extinct. 
Caesar  gives  a  striking  description  of  an  animal  of 
this  kind,  as  inhabiting  the  Hercynian  forest  {Gallic 
War,  vi.  28).  He  styles  it  the  urus,  and  his  account 
of  the  strength,  size,  form,  swiftness,  and  ferocity, 
by  which  it  was  distinguished,  harmonizes  well  with 
the  other  references  made  in  Scripture  (Job  xxxix. 
II  ;  Ps.  xxii.  21,  etc.)  to  the  animal  spoken  of  in  this 
passage.  In  ver.  23,  some  prefer  the  rendering 
"in"  to  "against,"  and  take  the  meaning  to  be 
that  the  arts  of  divination  were  not  practised  among 
the  Israelites.  This  was,  no  doubt,  true,  and  the 
original  is  perhaps  rather  in  favour  of  such  a  trans- 
lation, but  the  words  do  not  then  seem  congruous 
to  the  circumstances  of  the  speaker. 

Numb.  xxiv.  3 — 9.     This  passage  does  not  require 
much  emendation,  but  may  be  given  as  follows : — 

3.  "  Thus  saith  Balaam,  the  son  of  Beor, 

Thus  saith  the  man  whose  eyes  are  opened, 

4.  Thus  saith  he  who  has  heard  the  words  of  God, 
Who  hath  seen  the  vision  of  the  Almighty, 
And,  falling  down,  hath  had  his  eyes  opened  : 


6o  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 


5.  How  goodly  are  thy  tents,  O  Jacob  ! 
Thy  tabernacles,  O  Israel ! 

6.  As  the  valleys  are  they  spread  forth, 
As  gardens  by  the  river's  side. 

As  trees  of  sweet  aloes  which  the  Lord  hath  planted. 
As  cedar  trees  beside  the  waters. 

7.  He  shall  pour  forth  water  from  his  two  buckets, 
And  his  seed  shall  be  in  many  waters. 

And  his  king  shall  be  higher  than  Agag, 
And  his  kingdom  shall  be  exalted. 

8.  God  brought  him  forth  out  of  Egypt, 

He  hath,  as  it  were,  the  strength  of  an  urus  : 
He  shall  eat  up  the  nations  his  enemies, 
And  shall  suck  dry  their  bones. 
And  shall  break  in  pieces  their  arrows. 

9.  He  couched,  he  lay  down  as  a  lion, 

And  as  a  great  lion  :  who  shall  raise  him  up  ? 
Blessed  is  he  that  blesseth  thee, 
And  cursed  is  he  that  curseth  thee." 

In  ver.  4,  the  "  falling  down  "  spoken  of  seems  to 
refer  to  the  powerful  physical  effect  produced  upon 
Balaam,  when  the  divine  afflatus  came  on  him :  he 
was  smitten  down,  and  the  eyes  of  his  spirit  v/ere 
opened.  In  ver.  7,  there  is  a  reference  to  the  mode 
of  irrigation  in  the  East :  the  water  is  poured  from 
two  buckets  suspended  at  the  two  ends  of  a  pole  ; 
and  so  Israel  should  be  well  watered,  or,  in  other 
words,  should  abound  in  blessings.  In  ver.  8,  the 
last  clause  is  very  obscure :  some  render  it,  *'  shall 
pierce  them  through  with  his  arrows,"  as  in  the 
Authorised  Version  ;  and  others,  **  shall  break  his 
own  arrows,"  as  having  no  further  need  of  them  ; 


CORRECTIONS   OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION     6i 

while  various  emendations  of  the  text  have  been 
proposed.  The  interpretation  given  above  is  sup- 
ported by  the  high  authority  of  De  Wette. 

Numb.  xxiv.  15 — 25.  This,  the  concluding  pro- 
phecy of  Balaam,  is  the  most  remarkable  of  the 
whole.  It  is  in  one  or  two  parts  very  obscure ;  but 
the  common  English  version  may,  with  some  degree 
of  certainty,  be  improved  as  follows  : — 

"And  he  took  up  his  parable,  and  said, — 

15.  "  Balaam,  the  son  of  Beor,  saith, 

And  the  man  whose  eyes  are  open  saith, 

16.  He  saith  who  hath  heard  the  words  of  God, 
And  known  the  knowledge  of  the  Most  High, 
And  seen  the  vision  of  the  Almighty, 

Who,  falling  down,  hath  had  his  eyes  opened, — 

17.  I  see  him,  though  he  be  not  now, 
I  behold  him,  though  not  near  ; 
There  cometh  forth  a  star  out  of  Jacob, 
And  there  riseth  a  sceptre  out  of  Israel, 
And  he  smiteth  Moab  on  every  side. 
And  uprooteth  all  the  sons  of  tumult. 

18.  And  Edom  is  his  possession, 

And  Seir,  belonging  to  his  enemies,  is  his  possession. 
And  Israel  doeth  mightily, 

19.  And  he  ruleth  out  of  Jacob, 

And  destroyeth  him  that  escaped  from  the  city. 

"  And  he  looked  upon  the  Amalekites,  and  took 
up  his  parable,  and  said, — 

20.  **  Amalek  is  the  first  of  the  nations, 
But  his  end  is  utter  destruction. 


62  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

*'  And  he  looked  on  the  Kenites,  and  took  up  his 
parable,  and  said, — 

21.  **  Strong  be  thy  dwelling-place, 
And  put  thou  thy  nest  upon  a  rock  ; 

22.  Only  then  for  destruction  is  Kain, 

"When  Asshur  shall  carry  thee  away  captive. 

**  And  he  took  up  his  parable,  and  said,— 

23.  "  Alas  !  who  shall  live  when  God  doeth  this  ? 

24.  And  ships  shall  come  from  the  coast  of  Chittim  (Cyprus), 
And  shall  humble  Asshur,  and  humble  Eber, 

And  his  end,  too,  is  utter  destruction. 

'*  And  Balaam  rose  up,  and  set  forth,  and  returned 
to  his  place ;  and  Balak  also  went  his  way," 

The  most  remarkable  statements  in  this  passage 
are  those  contained  in  ver.  17.  No  one  can  doubt 
the  extraordinary  elevation  of  Balaam's  mind  when 
he  uttered  these  words.  But  the  question  arises  as 
to  the  properly  Messianic  import  of  the  announce- 
ment. Those  critics  who  deny  a  reference  to  the 
Messiah  in  Gen.  xlix.  10,  follow  the  same  course 
with  respect  to  this  passage.  But  the  remarks  made 
above,  on  the  former  text,  also  apply  here.  There 
is,  I  believe,  in  the  utterance  of  Balaam,  a  still 
clearer  allusion  to  the  coming  Messiah  than  is  to  be 
found  in  the  words  of  Jacob.  True,  there  is  no 
reason  to  suppose  that  Balaam  himself  had  anything 
like  a  full  idea  of  the  meaning  of  the  words  he  uttered. 
How   much   they  may  have   conveyed    to   his  con- 


CORRECTIONS   OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.     63 

sciousness  we  cannot  tell.     But  he  himself  was  well 
aware  that  a  supernatural  power  had  now  taken  pos- 
session of  him,  and  was  making  him  the  medium  of 
announcing  what   of  himself  he  did  not  desire  to 
speak,  and  what  he  certainly  did  not  wholly  under- 
stand.    The  Jews  manifestly  regarded  the  passage 
as  Messianic,  for  we  find  that  the  title  assumed  by 
one  of  the  many  false  Christs  who  appeared  after  our 
Lord's  death  was  Barcochha,  that  is,  "  The  Son  of  a 
Star," — a  title  obviously  derived  from  the  language 
of  this  passage.     We  are  reminded  also  of  the  star 
which  guided  the  wise  men  of  the  East  to  the  infant 
Saviour,  and  cannot  but  believe  that,  in  that  region 
to  which  Balaam  himself  belonged,  the  memory  of 
his  great  prediction  had  been  preserved  from  gene- 
ration to  generation.     In  ver.  22,  the  meaning  seems 
to  be  that  the  Kenites,  as  the  friends  of  Israel  (comp. 
Numb.  X.  32,  etc.)  would  be  preserved  from  ruin  as 
long  as  the  Israelites   themselves  escaped,  but   the 
triumph    of  Asshur   would    be    destructive   to   both 
peoples ;  so  terrible  indeed  would  be  the  results  of 
that  event,  that  Balaam  shudders  to  contemplate  it, 
and  regards  it  as  tantamount  to  the  overthrow  of  all 
peace  and  prosperity  upon  the  earth. 

Deut.  vii.  5,  xvi.  21.  The  first  of  these  passages 
is  thus  rendered  in  the  Authorised  Version :  "  But 
thus  shall  ye  deal  with  them:  ye  shall  destroy  the 


64  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

altars,  and  break  down  their  images,  and  cut  down 
their  groves,  and  burn  their  graven  images  with 
fire;"  while  in  the  second  we  find,  ''Thou  shalt 
not  plant  thee  a  grove  of  any  trees  near  unto  the 
altar  of  the  Lord  thy  God,  which  thou  shalt  make 
thee."  But  the  word  translated  **  grove "  in  these 
and  other  passages  should,  as  before  remarked,  be 
rendered  "■  wooden  idol,"  literally  **  an  Asherah." 
The  reference  is  to  the  pillars  of  wood  which  were 
erected  in  honour  of  the  Phoenician  goddess  Ash- 
taroth,  the  classical  Astarte,  or,  in  general,  Venus. 
It  is  said  that  the  Koran,  notwithstanding  its  asser- 
tion, even  to  weariness,  of  the  worship  of  one  God, 
has  not  been  able  to  eradicate,  in  countries  like 
Egypt,  this  ancient  pillar  worship,  even  down  to 
the  present  day. 

Deut.  xxxii.  40 — 42.  Both  the  punctuation  and,  to 
a  certain  extent,  the  meaning  of  these  verses,  as 
given  in  the  Authorised  Version,  should  probably 
be  altered.  The  passage  will  then  stand  thus : 
**  For  I  lift  up  my  hand  to  heaven,  and  say.  As  I 
live  for  ever,  if  I  whet  my  glittering  sword,  and 
mine  hand  take  hold  on  judgment,  I  will  render 
vengeance  to  mine  enemies,  and  will  recompense 
them  that  hate  me  ;  I  will  make  mine  arrows  drunk 
with  blood,  and  my  sword  shall  devour  flesh,  from 
the  blood  of  the  slain  and  the  captives,  from  the 
chief  of  the  princes  of  the  enemy." 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.     65 

Deut.  xxxiii.  The  following  is  a  continuous 
rendering  of  this  striking  chapter,  with  which  the 
Pentateuch,  as  far  as  Moses  is  concerned,  sublimely 
closes.  No  one  can  read  it  attentively  without 
perceiving  how  closely  it  links  itself  on  to  the 
blessings  pronounced  by  Jacob  in  Gen.  xlix. 

"And  this  is  the  blessing  wherewith  Moses  the 
man  of  God  blessed  the  children  of  Israel  before 
his  death.     And  he  said, — 

2.  "The  Lord  came  from  Sinai, 
And  rose  up  from  Seir  unto  them  ; 
He  shined  forth  from  Mount  Paran, 

And  He  came  from  amidst  myriads  of  holy  ones  : 
From  His  right  hand  went  a   fire  :  law  [was  given]  for 
them. 

3.  Truly  He  loved  the  peoples  (tribes)  ; 
All  His  saints  are  in  thine  hand  ; 

And  they  sit  down  at  thy  feet,  to  receive  thy  words.* 

4.  Moses  commanded  us  a  law, 

As  the  inheritance  of  the  congregation  of  Jacob ; 

5.  And  he  was  king  in  Jeshurun,f 

When  the  heads  of  the  people  assembled, 
And  the  tribes  of  Israel  came  together. 

6.  Let  Reuben  live,  and  not  die, 

And  let  not  his  men  be  small  in  number. 

7.  And  this  [is  the  blessing]  to  Judah  ;  and  he  said, 
Heur,  Lord,  the  voice  of  Judah, 

And  bring  him  [back]  to  his  people  ; 

*  So  De  Wette,  but  the  clause  is  very  obscure. 

t  The  "Speaker's  Commentary"  here  remarks,  "Rather  he 
became  king;  i.e.,  the  Lord,  not  Moses,  who  is  never  spoken  of 
as  '  a  king.'  "     But  the  natural  reference  is  to  Moses. 


66  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 


Let  his  hands  be  sufficient  for  him  ; 

And  be  thou  a  help  to  him  from  his  enemies. 

8.  And  of  Levi  he  said, 

Let  thy   Thummim*   and   thy  Urim  be   with   thy  holy 

one,t 
Whom  thou  (Israel)  didst  try  at  Massah, 
And  didst  strive  with  at  the  waters  of  Meribah  ; 

9.  Who  said  of  his  father  and  of  his  mother,  I  have  not  seen 

them, 
And  did  not  acknowledge  hi&  brethren, 
Nor  knew  his  own  sons, 
For  they  observed  Thy  word  [O  Lord], 
And  kept  Thy  covenant.J 

10.  They  shall  teach  Jacob  Thy  judgments, 
And  Israel  Thy  law  ; 

They  shall  put  incense  before  Thee, 
And  burnt  sacrifice  upon  Thine  altar. 

11.  Bless,  O  Lord,  his  strength, 

And  let  the  work  of  his  hands  please  Thee  ; 

Smite  the  loins  of  those  that  rise  against  him, 

And  of  them  that  hate  him,  that  they  rise  not  again. 

12.  And  of  Benjamin  he  said, 

The  beloved  of  the  Lord  shall  dwell  in  safety  upon  him ; 

He  (the  Lord)  shall  shelter  him  day  by  day, 

And  he  (Benjamin)  shall  dwell  between  His  shoulders. 

13.  And  of  Joseph  he  said, 
Blessed  be  his  land  of  the  Lord, 

With  the  precious  things  of  heaven,  with  the  dew, 


*  De  Wette  renders,  "  Let  thy  truth  and  thy  light  be."  It  is 
remarkable  that  Thummim  in  this  place  alone  stands  before 
Urim. 

t  That  is,  Levi. 

X  The  meaning  is  that  the  closest  earthly  ties  were  disregarded 
in  order  to  preser\'e  faithfulness  to  God.     (Compare  Matt.  x.  37.) 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.     67 


And  with  the  deep  which  coucheth  beneath, 

14.  And  with  the  precious  fruits  produced  by  the  sun, 
And  with  the  precious  fruits  drawn  forth  by  the  moon, 

15.  And  with  the  chief  things  of  the  ancient  mountains. 
And  with  the  precious  things  of  the  everlasting  hills, 

16.  And  with  the  precious  things  of  the  earth,  and  the  fulness 

thereof; 
And  let  the  good  will  of  Him  that  dwelt  in  the  bush 
Come  upon  the  head  of  Joseph, 
Even  upon  the  crown  of  him  that  was  separated  from  his 

brethren. 

17.  The  firstborn  of  his  (Joseph's)  bullock  is  his  glory  ;  * 
His  horns  are  as  the  horns  of  an  urus  ; 

With  them  he  shall  thrust  the  peoples 
-    Together  to  the  ends  of  the  earth  ; 

And  they  are  the  ten  thousands  of  Ephraim, 
And  they  are  the  thousands  of  Manasseh. 

18.  And  of  Zebulon  he  said, 

Rejoice,  Zebulon,  in  thy  going  forth, 
And,  Issachar,  ifi  thy  tents  : 

19.  They  shall  call  peoples  to  the  mountains, 
There  they  shall  offer  sacrifices  of  righteousness, 
For  they  shall  suck  of  the  abundance  of  the  seas. 
And  of  the  hidden  treasures  of  the  sand.f 

20.  And  of  Gad  he  said. 

Blessed  be  he  that  enlargeth  Gad  ; 

He  coucheth  as  a  lion, 

And  teareth  the  arm,  and  the  crown  of  the  head. 

And  he  provided  the  firstfruits  for  himself, 

For  there  was  the  leader's  portion  reserved.  J 


*  The  reference  is  to  Ephraim,  who  is  likened  to  the  firstling 
of  Joseph's  bullock. 

■j-  All  the  treasures  yielded  by  the  sea. 
\  Compare  Numb,  xxxii. 


68  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

And  he  came  with  the  heads  of  the  people  ;  * 
He  carried  out  the  justice  of  the  Lord, 
And  his  judgments  with  Israel. 

22.  And  of  Dan  he  said, 
Dan  is  a  lion's  whelp  ; 

He  springeth  forth  from  Bashan. 

23.  And  of  Naphtali  he  said, 

O  Naphtali,  satisfied  with  favour, 
And  full  of  the  blessings  of  the  Lord, 
Possess  thou  the  sea  and  the  sunny  district.f 

24.  And  of  Asher  he  said, 
Blessed  in  sons  %  be  Asher, 

Let  him  be  acceptable  to  his  brethren, 
And  let  him  dip  his  foot  in  oil. 

25.  Thy  shoes  shall  be  iron  and  brass  ; 
As  thy  days,  so  shall  thy  strength  be.§ 

26.  There  is  none  like  unto  God,  O  Jeshurun, 
Who  rideth  in  the  heaven  for  thy  help. 
And  in  His  excellency  on  the  clouds. 

27.  The  eternal  God  is  thy  dwelling-place. 
And  underneath  are  the  everlasting  arms. 

And  He  shall  thrust  oiit  the  enemy  from  before  thee, 
And  shall  say.  Destroy  them. 

28.  And  Israel  shall  dwell  in  safety  ; 

*  De  Wette  renders  "  at  the  head  of  the  people.'' 

f  Or,  "  the  west  and  the  south." 

\  Some  prefer  "blessed  above  the  sons  (of  Jacob),"  but  this 
would  not  be  in  accordance  with  the  facts. 

§  One  is  unwilling  to  throw  any  doubt  upon  this  beautiful 
text.  But  the  translation  is  far  from  certain ;  and  even  if  the 
words  are  allowed  to  stand  as  above,  we  are  told  in  the 
"Speaker's  Commentary"  that  the  sense  is,  "thy  strength 
.shall  be  continued  to  thee  as  long  as  thou  shalt  live  :  thou 
shalt  never  know  feebleness  and  decay." 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.      69 

Alone  shall  the  fountain  of  Jacob  be, 
Upon  a  land  of  corn  and  wine  ; 
Also  his  heavens  shall  drop  down  dew. 
29.  Happy  art  thou,  O  Israel !  who  is  like  unto  thee  ? 
A  people  saved  by  the  Lord, 
The  shield  of  thy  help, 
And  who  is  the  sword  of  thine  excellency  ; 
And  thine  enemies  shall  cringe  before  thee, 
And  thou  slialt  tread  upon  their  high  places, *! 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE    PROPHETS.— CORRECTIONS     OF    THE 
AUTHORISED  ENGLISH  VERSION. 

AVERY  wide  field  here  opens  up  before  us,  and 
we  must  be  content  to  pass  lightly  over  it.  As 
was  indicated  in  the  first  chapter,  many  of  the 
properly  historical  books  have  been  classed  with  the 
Prophets.  But  as  it  is  in  the  Prophets,  strictly  so 
called,  that  most  of  the  errors  and  obscurities  ob- 
servable in  our  common  English  version  are  to  be 
found,  I  shall  devote  the  greater  part  of  this  chapter 
to  these,  and  shall  not  linger  over  such  books  as 
Joshua,  Judges,  and  Kings,  which  are,  upon  the 
whole,  comparatively  well  translated. 

Joshua  V.  14.  I  select  this  verse  for  remark, 
because  it  is  one  of  a  large  class  of  passages  in 
which  a  greater  precision  of  rendering  is  called  for 
than  appears  in  our  English  version.  The  word 
translated  *'  captain  "  in  the  clause,  *'  as  captain  of 
the  host  of  the  Lord  am  I  now  come,"  received  in 
other  passages  such  renderings  as  the  following: — 


72  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

chiefs  general^  governor,  keeper,  lord,  master,  prince, 
steward,  etc. ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  our  English 
word  **  captain"  represents  no  fewer  than  twelve 
different  Hebrew  words.  Now,  while  it  is  true,  as 
has  been  well  remarked,  that  "  scarcely  any  problem 
is  more  perplexing  to  the  translator  of  the  Old 
Testament  than  to  find  appropriate  designations  for 
the  officials  and  dignitaries,  civil  and  military,  among 
the  Jews  and  related  nations,"  *  the  facts  just  stated 
are  sufficient  to  suggest  that  there  is  a  great  amount 
of  unnecessary  vagueness,  with  respect  to  the  render- 
ing of  such  terms,  in  our  Authorised  Version.  There 
must  be  a  certain  amount  of  indefiniteness  and  con- 
fusion even  after  every  effort  has  been  made  ;  but 
that  tnay  nevertheless  be  greatly  reduced  from  what 
now  exists ;  and  an  improvement  of  this  kind  will 
be  much  to  the  advantage  of  the  ordinary  English 
reader. 

Judges  V.  15 — 31.  This  chapter  contains  the  song 
of  Deborah,  which  is  a  composition  of  the  loftiest 
order  of  poetry,  though  in  some  of  its  parts  ex- 
tremely  difficult.  There  is  not  a  verse  in  our  English 
translation  but  admits,  more  or  less,  of  emendation. 
I  have  chosen  the  latter  half  of  the  song  for  illus- 


*  Lange's  Comm.   on  Old   Test,:  Joshua,  translated  by  Dr. 
Bliss,  p.  62. 


CORRECTIONS   OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.     73 

tration,  both  as  being  very  striking  in  itself,  and 
as  suffering  sadly  in  our  Authorised  Version.  Of 
course,  no  claim  is  made  for  absolute  correctness 
in  presenting  the  following  translation.  All  that  I 
endeavour  to  do  is  to  remove  some  obvious  blemishes 
which  exist  in  our  common  English  version,  and 
thus  bring  out  more  clearly  the  beauties  of  the 
original.  But  no  translation  can  do  it  justice — 
none,  in  particular,  can  represent  the  emphatic  and 
impressive  alliteratio7i  by  which  the  Hebrew  is 
distinguished. 

The  song  consists  of  an  introduction  (2 — 5) 
devoted  to  the  praise  of  God  ;  and  then  successively 
of  a  description  of  the  misery  which  had  existed 
(6 — 8),  of  gratitude  that  deliverance  had  been  secured 
(9 — 11),  of  a  commendation  of  those  who  took  part 
in  the  battle,  or  were,  at  least,  willing  to  help  (12 — 
15),  of  a  sarcastic  condemnation  of  the  tribes  which, 
though  near  at  hand,  gave  no  assistance  to  Zebulon 
and  Naphtali,  who  had  boldly  encountered  the  op- 
pressor (15 — 18),  an  account  of  the  victory  (19 — 
23),  and  a  powerful  picture  of  the  death  of  Sisera, 
with  its  attendant  circumstances.  It  should  be 
noticed  that  verse  16  ought  to  begin  with  what  is 
the  middle  of  verse  15  in  our  Authorised  Version. 
Deborah  exclaims, — 

15.  "Among  the  streams  of  Reuben,  there  were  mighty  reso- 
lutions of  heart ! 


74  OLD   7  EST  A  MEN!  REVISION. 

16.  Why  sittest  thou  by  the  folds,  to  listen  to  the  flute  of  the 

herds  ? 
Among  the  streams  of  Reuben,  there  was  great  delibera- 
tion of  heart ! 

17.  Gilead  rested  on  the  other  side  of  Jordan  j 
And  Dan,  why  abode  he  in  his  ships  ? 

Asher  sat  by  the  sea-shore,  and  rested  in  his  bays. 

18.  But  Zebulon  was  a  tribe  that  hazarded  his  soul  unto  death, 
And  Naphtali  [also]  on  the  high  places  of  the  field. 

19.  Kings  came  to  fight — then  kings  of  Canaan  fought — 
At  Taanach — at  the  waters  of  Megiddo. 

Booty  of  silver  gained  they  none. 

20.  They  fought  from  heaven  : 

The  stars  in  their  courses  fought  against  Sisera. 

21.  The  river  of  Kishon  swept  them  away — 

A  stream  of  assistance  was  Kishon's  stream. 

22.  March  boldly  on,  my  soul  ! 

Then  the  hoofs  of  the  horses  struck  the  ground, 
From  the  fast  gallopping  of  their  brave  riders. 

23.  Curse  ye  Meroz,  saith  tVe  angel  of  the  Lord» 
Curse  ye  bitterly  the  inhabitants  thereof ; 
Because  they  came  not  to  the  help  of  the  Lord| 
To  the  help  of  the  Lord  against  the  mighty. 

24.  Extolled  above  women  be  Jael, 
The  wife  of  Heber  the  Kenite, 
Extolled  above  women  in  the  tent. 

25.  He  asked  for  water  :  she  gave  him  milk  ; 
She  brought  him  cream  in  a  lordly  dish, 

26.  She  stretched  forth  her  hand  to  the  nail, 
Her  right  hand  to  the  workmen's  hammer, 
And  she  smote  Sisera  ;  she  crushed  his  head 

And  she  crashed  through,  .and  transfixed  his  temples 

27.  At  her  feet  he  curled  himself,  he  fell,  he  lay  still ; 
At  her  feet  he  curled  himself,  he  fell, 

And  where  he  curled  himself,  there  he  fell  dead. 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.     75 

28.  Through  the  window  there  looked, 

And  through  the  lattice  there  called  the  mother  of  Sisera, 
Why  is  his  chariot  so  long  in  coming  ? 
Why  tarry  the  wheels  of  his  chariots  ? 

29.  Her  wise  ladies  answered  her, 

Yea,  she  herself  answered  her  own  words : 

30.  Will  they  not  find  booty,  and  divide  it  ? 

A  maiden,  [yea]  two  maidens  for  each  man, 

A  booty  of  coloured  garments  for  Sisera, 

A  booty  of  coloured  garments  of  needlework, 

A  coloured  garment,  [yea]  two  garments  of  needlework 

For  the  necks  of  [them  that  take  the]  spoil. 

31.  So  let  all  Thine  enemies  perish,  O  Lord, 

But  let  them  that  love  him  be  as  the  sun  when  he  goeth 
forth  in  his  might." 

A  few  explanatory  remarks  may  be  added  to  this 
translation.  In  ver.  15,  16,  the  tribe  of  Reuben  is 
taunted  with  the  grand  purposes  which  were 
cherished,  but  led  to  no  practical  result.  The 
expression  "herds,"  in  ver.  16,  seems  to  be 
equivalent  to  "herdsmen."  "Gilead,"  in  ver.  17, 
probably  refers  to  the  tribe  of  Gad  and  the  half- 
tribe  of  Manasseh  ;  so  that,  these  also  being  ex- 
cluded, none  of  the  tribes  east  of  the  Jordan  took 
part  in  the  war.  In  fact,  as  appears  from  chap.  iv. 
10  (comp.  v.  18),  only  Zebulon  and  Naphtali  mus- 
tered on  the  plains  of  Issachar,  and  engaged  in 
the  battle  with  Sisera.  In  ver.  19,  the  expression 
"kings"  must  be  understood  as  simply  denoting 
mighty  men.     The  real  meaning  of  the  second  clause 


76  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION, 

of  ver.  21  is  very  doubtful,  but  that  given  above 
seems  best  to  represent  the  original.  Being  in  flood, 
the  river  Kishon  "  assisted "  the  Israelites  in  the 
destruction  of  Sisera's  host.  The  same  verse 
strikingly  depicts  the  hurried  flight  of  the  conquered 
foe,  as  well  as  Deborah's  exultation  in  picturing  to 
herself  the  spectacle.  Verses  24 — 26  are  a  mere 
patriotic  outburst,  and  do  not  necessarily  imply  a 
moral  approbation  of  the  conduct  of  Jael  (compare 
Ps.  cxxxvii.  9).''''  In  ver.  30,  the  rendering  is  doubtful 
in  the  last  clause ;  and  where  certainty  cannot  be 
reached,  it  is  better  to  adhere  to  the  Authorised 
Version.  The  close  of  the  song  is  most  striking 
from  the  silence  which  it  preserves  as  to  the  disap- 
pointment of  Sisera's  mother.  No  language,  how- 
ever eloquent,  could  have  been  so  forcible  and 
impressive. 

I  Kings  iv.  24.  I  refer  to  this  passage  simply  as 
illustrating  the  needless  and  hurtful  variation  which 
too  often  occurs  in  our  version  with  respect  to  the 

*  The  reader  of  Scotch  history  may  recall  the  vigorous  lines 
of  Sir  David  Lindsay,  with  reference  to  the  murder  of  Cardinal 
Beaton ; — 

•'  As  for  the  Cardinal,  we  grant, 
He  was  a  man  we  weel  might  wan^ 

And  we'll  forget  him  sone  ; 
And  yet  I  think,  the  sooth  to  say. 
Although  the  lown  is  weel  away. 
The  deed  was  foully  done." 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.    77 

rendering  of  the  names  of  places  and  persons. 
Here  the  familiar  "Gaza"  appears  as  **Azzah,"  to 
the  manifest  bewilderment  of  the  reader.  So,  again, 
at  Deut.  ii.  23  ;  Jer.  xxv.  20.  In  like  manner,  we 
have  Enoch  and  Henoch;  fared  and  Jered ;  Perez  and 
Pharez  ;  Ai  and  Hai ;  and  evQn  Jonaihan  dcXidi  Jeho- 
nathaft,  with  many  others.  It  is  obvious  that  such 
diversities  cannot  but  prove  perplexing,  and  that 
the  same  persons  and  places,  as  often  as  they 
recur,  should  be  spoken  of  under  the  same  appel- 
lation. 

Isaiah  v.  7.  This  passage  may  be  briefly  noticed 
as  containing  one  of  those  striking  assonances^  or 
jingles  of  sound,  so  frequent  in  the  writings  of 
Isaiah.  It  is  very  desirable,  if  possible,  to  preserve 
these  in  translating  into  English,  though  that  can 
very  rarely  be  done  without  some  sacrifice  of  the 
sense.  No  endeavour  is  here  made  in  our  common 
version  to  imitate  the  jingle  of  the  original.  That 
has,  however,  been  attempted  as  follows  : — 

*'  He  looked  for  reason,  but  behold  treason  ; 
For  right,  but  h^oXA  fright." 

But  this  sacrifices  the  sense  to  the  sound,  and 
the  cost  of  reproducing  the  assonance  in  English 
has  therefore  been  well  described  as  "  too  dear."  * 
A  more  satisfactory  effort   has  been   made    by  the 


*  Revisioji  of  the  Old  Test.,  by  Dr.  Davidson,  p.  52. 


78  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION, 


English    translator    of    Ewald's    Commentary    on 
Isaiah : — 

**He  waited  for  rights  but  behold  might ; 
For  exactness,  but  behold  exaciio7i,'" 

Isaiah  vii.  14 — 16.  This  passage  is,  in  several 
parts,  erroneously  given  in  our  Authorised  Version. 
It  should  stand  as  follows  : — 

14.  "  Therefore  the  Lord  Himself  will  give  you  a  sign  : 
Behold,  the  young  woman  shall  conceive  and  bear  a  son. 
And  shall  call  His  name  Immanuel. 

15.  Cream  and  honey  shall  He  eat, 

When  He  shall  know  to  refuse  the  evil  and  choose  the 
good; 

16.  For  ere  the  boy  knoweth  to  refuse  the  evil  and  choose  the 

good. 
The   land  before  whose  two  kings  thou  tremblest  shall 
be  desolate." 

Isaiah  viii.  19,  20.  The  20th  verse  runs  as  follow 
in  our  Authorised  Version : — "  To  the  law  and  to 
the  testimony ;  if  they  speak  not  according  to  this 
word,  it  is  because  there  is  no  light  in  them  ; "  and 
the  passage  is  very  frequently  quoted  in  support  of 
the  supreme  authority  of  Scripture.  But  it  is  certain 
that  our  translation  is  wrong,  and  the  verses  should 
stand  something  like  this  : — 

19.  "  And  if  they  shall  say  unto  you, 

Enquire  of  the  ghost-seers  and  of  the  magicians. 
That  chirp  and  that  mutter  ; 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.    79 

(Shall  not  a  people  apply  to  their  gods, 
To  the  dead  instead  of  the  living  ?) 
.    20.  [Reply]  To  the  doctrine  and  to  the  oracle  I 
Do  not  they  speak  according  to  this  word, 
For  whom  there  is  no  morning  brightness  ?  " 

Isaiah  ix.  i.  This  verse  ought  to  belong  to  chap, 
viii.,  and  should  be  translated  as  follows : — **  Yet 
there  is  not  darkness  where  is  (now)  distress :  as  the 
former  time  brought  shame  to  the  land  of  Zebulon 
and  the  land  of  Naphtali,  so  the  latter  time  brings 
honour  (to  the  district)  beside  the  sea,  beyond 
Jordan,   the  circuit  of  the  heathen." 

These  may  suffice  as  specimens  of  the  alterations 
required  in  detached  passages.  I  shall  now  set 
before  the  reader  a  whole  chapter  more  exactly 
rendered  than  in  our  common  version.  And  I  shall 
select  the  familiar  fifty-third  chapter,  as  in  some 
respects  the  most  interesting  in  the  whole  book. 
The  reader  will  mark  the  departures  from  the  Autho- 
rised Version.  These  are  not  very  numerous  or 
important,  even  when  chap.  lii.  13 — 15  is  taken  with 
chap,  liii.,  as  is  now  generally  and  properly  done  : — 

lii.  13.  "Behold,  my  servant  shall  be  successful  : 

He  shall  be  lofty,  and  exalted,  and  be  very  high. 
14.  Just  as  many  were  amazed  at  thee — 

His  visage  was  so  marred  more  than  any  man, 
And  His  form  more  than  the  sons  of  men — 
15.    So  will  He  make  many  nations  joyful ; 
Kings  shall  shut  their  mouths  before  Him, 


8o  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

For  that  which  had  not  been  told  them  shall  they  see, 

And  that  which  they  had  not  heard  shall  they  under- 
stand, 
liii.  I.   Who  believed  our  report  ? 

And  to  whom  was  the  arm  of  the  Lord  revealed  ? 
2.    He  grew  up  before  him  as  a  tender  plant, 

And  as  a  root  out  of  a  dry  ground, 

He  had  no  form  nor  comeliness,  that  we  should  behold 
Him, 

And  no  beauty  that  we  should  desire  Him. 

3.  He  was  despised  and  rejected  of  men, 

A  man  of  sorrows,  and  acquainted  with  grief ; 
And  as  one  who  hideth  his  countenance  before  us, 
He  was  despised,  and  we  esteemed  Him  not. 

4.  Surely  He  bare  our  ills, 

And  laid  our  sorrows  upon  Himself; 

Yet  we  did  deem  Him  stricken, 

Smitten  of  God,  and  afHicted. 
5.  But  He  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions, 

He  was  bruised  for  our  iniquities  ; 

The  chastisement  of  our  peace  was  upon  Him, 

And  with  His  stripes  we  were  healed. 
6.  All  we  like  sheep  had  gone  astray. 

We  had  turned  every  one  to  his  own  way. 

And  the  Lord  caused  to  fall  on  Him  the  iniquity  of 
us  all. 

7.  Oppressed  was  He,  yet  He  humbled  himself, 
And  opened  not  His  mouth. 

He  was  brought  as  a  lamb  to  the  slaughter. 
And  was  dumb  as  a  sheep  before  her  shearers, 
And  opened  not  His  mouth. 

8.  He  was  taken  from  prison  and  from  judgment ; 
And  in  His  generation  who  considered 

That  He  was  taken  away  from  the  land  of  the  living, 
That  for  the  transgression  of  my  people  He  was  stricken? 


CORRECTIONS   OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.    8i 

9.  He  had  His  grave  with  the  wicked, 
And  was  with  the  godless  in  His  death, 
Although  He  had  done  no  injustice, 
And  there  was  no  deceit  in  His  mouth. 

10.  Yet  it  pleased  the  Lord  to  bruise  Him  ; 
He  put  Him  to  grief; 

But  when  He  has  made  His  soul  an  offering  for  sin. 

He  shall  see  His  seed, 

He  shall  prolong  His  days, 

And  the  pleasure  of  the  Lord  shall  prosper  in  His  hand, 

11.  Of  the  travail  of  His  soul  He  shall  see,  He  shall  be 

satisfied  ; 
By  His  wisdom  shall  my  righteous  servant  justify  many, 
And  He  shall  bear  their  iniquities. 

12.  Therefore  I  will  allot  Him  a  portion  with  the  great, 
And  He  shall  divide  the  spoil  with  the  strong ; 
Because  that  He  poured  out  His  soul  unto  death ; 
And  He  was  numbered  with  transgressors, 

While  He  bare  the  sin  of  many, 
And  interceded  for  ti-ansgressors." 

Jer.  xvii.  9.  This  verse  stands  as  follows  in  the 
Authorised  Version  : — '*  The  heart  is  deceitful  above 
all  things,  and  desperately  wicked ;  who  can  know 
it  ?  "  The  translation  "  desperately  wicked  "  is  cer- 
tainly too  strong,  and  has  given  rise  to  the  charge 
that  our  translators  were  here  influenced  by  dogmatic 
bias  in  the  rendering  which  they  adopted.  This, 
however,  is  a  charge  which  should  not  be  made 
against  any  man,  or  body  of  men,  except  on  grounds 
that  can  hardly  be  disputed.  And  perhaps  it  is  not 
necessary  to   bring   so   grave  an  accusation  against 

6 


82  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

the  framers  of  our  Authorised  Version,  because  they 
gave  such  a  strong  rendering  to  the  Hebrew  word 
which  occurs  in  this  passage.  That  word  properly 
means  "  seriously  diseased,"  and,  when  used  meta- 
phorically, easily  assumes  the  meaning  which  our 
translators  have  assigned  it.  But,  while  disposed  to 
acquit  them  of  any  sinister  motives  in  the  rendering 
which  they  preferred,  it  must,  at  the  same  time,  be 
admitted  that  the  language  used  is  unnecessarily, 
and  even  unjustifiably,  strong.  Human  nature  is 
not  unfairly  dealt  with  in  the  Bible.  Its  excellences, 
as  well  as  its  errors,  are  acknowledged ;  and  it  is 
certainly  not  the  part  of  a  lover  of  the  truth  either 
to  depreciate  the  former  or  to  exaggerate  the  latter. 
Aiming  at  absolute  accuracy,  which  shall  neither  go 
beyond,  nor  fall  short  of,  the  meaning  of  the  original, 
the  verse  before  us  may  be  rendered — **  The  heart  is 
deceitful  above  all  things,  and  depraved:  who  can 
know  it  ?  " 

Ezek.  xxvii.  1 1 .  The  translation  of  this  verse,  found 
in  our  Authorised  Version,  affords  an  opportunity  of 
calling  attention  to  a  pretty  large  class  of  errors 
which  exists  in  it.  Not  unfrequently  words  have 
been  regarded  as  proper  names,  and  left  standing  in 
their  original  form,  when  they  might  and  ought  to 
have  been  translated.  This  is  the  case  with  the  term 
*'  Gammadims,"  which  occurs  in  the  verse  before  us. 


CORRECTIONS   OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.    ^Z 

*  The  Gammadims,"  it  is  said,  "  were  in  thy  towers  ;  " 
while  the  real  meaning  is,  **  heroes  were  in  thy 
towers."  In  the  same  way,  instead  of  *'  the  book  of 
Jasher,"  we  ought  to  read  **  the  book  of  the  pious,"" 
or  "upright";  and  "men  of  Belial"  should  simply 
be  referred  to  as  "  wicked,"  or  *'  worthless  men." 
The  converse  error,  however,  has  at  times  been 
committed ;  and  the  names  of  places  have  been 
translated  as  if  they  were  common  nouns.  So  is  it, 
for  instance,  with  "  Bethel "  in  Judges  xx.  26,  which 
is  rendered,  according  to  its  etymology,  "the  house 
of  God,"  but  should  have  been  left  untranslated ; 
with  "  No-Ammon,"  in  Nahum  iii.  8,  which  is  trans- 
lated as  "populous  No,"  but  should  not  have  been 
changed ;  and  especially  with  the  word  "  Lehi,"  in 
Judges  XV.  19,  where  we  read  that  "God  clave  an 
hollow  place  that  was  in  the  jaw,  and  there  came 
water  thereout,"  whereas'the  translation  should  be, 
"  And  God  clave  the  hollow  place  that  is  in  Lehi, 
and  there  came  water  thereout."* 

Hosea  iv.  18.  This  verse  maybe  regarded  as  re- 
presentative of  the  many  difficulties  and  obscurities 
which  are  found  in  Hosea.  The  common  rendering, 
"  Her  rulers  with  shame  do  love,  Give  ye,"  is  cer- 
tainly not  right,  and  is,  indeed,  almost  unintelligible. 

*  JSible  Revision,  by  members  of  the  American  Revision  Com- 
mittee, p.  64. 


84  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

But  it  is  not  easy  to  suggest  anything  in  its  place. 
The  literal  translation  of  the  clause  probably  is, 
'*  Her  shields  with  eager  desire  are  in  love  with 
shame,"  and  the  expression  "  shields,"  being  used 
as  a  metaphor  for  "defenders,"  the  rendering  will 
be,  "  Her  rulers  are  ardently  in  love  with  shame." 

Hosea  xiv.  8.  In  the  Authorised  Version,  this  verse 
stands  as  follows  : — "Ephraim  (shall  say).  What  have 
I  to  do  any  more  with  idols  ?  I  have  heard  (him) 
and  observed  him.  I  (am)  like  a  green  fir  tree. 
From  me  is  thy  fruit  found."  But,  as  Jehovah  is  the 
speaker  in  the  context,  it  is  most  unnatural  to  intro- 
duce Ephraim  as  making  the  declaration  thus  ascribed 
to  him.  The  rendering  of  the  verse  should  rather 
be,  "Ephraim,  what  have  I  any  more  to  do  with 
idols  }  {i.e.,  in  reproving  thee  on  account  of  theni, 
since  Israel  has  returned  to  Jehovah.)  I  have 
answered,  and  will  watch*  over  him.  I  am  like  a 
green  cypress  tree.     From  me  is  thy  fruit  received." 

Joel  iii.  4.  The  word  "  Palestine  "  employed  in 
this  verse  is  apt  to  prove  misleading  :  it  should  rather 
be  Philistia.  The  "  coasts,"  or  "  borders,"  or,  more 
literally,  "  circles "  of  Philistia,  refer  to  the  five 
Philistine  principalities — Gaza,  Ashkelon,  Ashdod, 
Gath,  and  Ekron.  It  may  be  added  generally,  that 
there  are  not  a  few  such  geographical  errors  in  our 
common  version,  which  plainly  require  correction. 


CORRECTIONS   OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.     85 

Hob.  iii.  I — 16.  This  is  a  very  sublime,  though 
somewhat  irregular  and  obscure  passage.  It  certainly 
admits  of  being  rendered  with  greater  precision  than 
in  our  Authorised  Version.  We  must  acknowledge, 
however,  to  begin  with,  that  it  is  impossible  to  say 
with  any  certainty  what  is  the  meaning  of  the  term 
Shigionoth,  which  stands  at  the  head  of  the  chapter. 
It  probably  denotes  an  ode  of  the  kind  correspond- 
ing to  the  Greek  dithyrambic  poetry,  as  seen  in 
Pindar. 

1.  *'  A  prayer  of  Habakkuk  the  prophet,  in  lofty  strains. 

2.  O  Lord,  I  have  heard  the  report  of  Thee,  [and]  am  afraid  ; 
O  Lord,  revive  Thy  work  in  the  midst  of  the  years : 

In  the  midst  of  the  years  make  known  : 
In  wrath  remember  mercy. 

3.  God  comes  from  Teman, 

And  the  Holy  One  from  Mount  Paran.     Sdah  {Pause). 
His  splendour  covers  the  heavens, 
And  the  earth  is  full  of  His  praise. 

4.  And  His  brightness  is  as  the  sun-light  ; 
Rays  stream  forth  from  His  hand  ; 
And  there  is  the  hiding  of  His  power. 

5.  Before  Him  goes  the  pestilence, 

And  a  burning  plague  issues  at  His  feet. 

6.  He  stands,  and  measures  the  earth  ; 
He  looks,  and  makes  nations  tremble  ; 

And  the  everlasting  mountains  are  shattered  j 
The  perpetual  hills  sink  low  : 
His  ways  are  everlasting. 

7.  I  see  the  tents  of  Cushan  in  distress  ; 

The  tent  curtains  of  the  land  of  Midian  tremble. 


86  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

8.  Burns  Thy  wrath,  O  Lord,  against  the  rivers? 
Is  Thine  anger  against  the  rivers? 

Is  Thy  fury  against  the  sea, 

That  Thou  dost  ride  upon  Thy  horses, 

In  Thy  chariots  of  victory  ? 

9.  Thy  bow  is  made  entirely  bare  ; 

Chastisements  sworn  by  the  word  [are  inflicted].     Pause* 
Thou  dividest  the  earth  with  rivers. 

10.  The  mountains  see  Thee  ;  they  tremble ; 
A  flood  of  water  passes  over ; 

The  abyss  utters  its  voice  ; 
It  lifts  up  its  hands  on  high. 

11.  Sun  and  moon  stand  still  in  their  habitation, 

On  account  of  the  light  of  Thy  fast-flying  arrows, 
And  the  sheen  of  the  lightning  of  Thy  spear. 

12.  In  anger  Thou  marchest  through  the  earth ; 
In  wrath  Thou  treadest  down  nations, 

13.  Thou  goest  forth  for  the  salvation  of  Thy  people  ; 
For  salvation  to  Thine  anointed  : 

Thou  shatterest  the  head  from  the  house  of  the  wicked. 
Laying  bare  the  foundation  even  to  the  neck.     Pause. 

14.  Thou   piercest   with   his   own    spears    the    chief   of   his 

captains, 
Who  rush  on  as  a  tempest  to  scatter  us  ; 
Their  rejoicing  is,  as  it  were,  to  devour  the  afflicted  in 

secret. 

15.  Thou  treadest  upon  the  sea  with  Thy  horses. 
Upon  the  foam  of  many  waters. 

16.  I  heard,  and  my  heart  trembled; 
At  the  voice  my  lips  quivered  ; 
Rottenness  entered  into  my  bones ; 
My  knees  shake  beneath  me  ; 

Who  am  to  wait  quietly  for  the  day  of  distress, 
For  the  approach  of  him  to  the  people,  who  is  to  oppress 
them. 


CORRECTIONS   OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.    87 

Several  of  the  renderings  in  the  above  passage 
are  little  better  than  conjecture,  and  there  seems 
to  be  no  means  of  attaining  certainty.  The  second 
clause  of  ver.  9  is  especially  doubtful,  and  it  is 
said  that  more  than  a  hundred  different  expla- 
nations of  it  have  been  proposed.  In  ver.  16,  the 
word  which  I  have  translated  "  heart "  is  literally 
"  belly."  But  that  does  not  suit  our  idiom,  and 
clearly  ought  to  be  replaced  by  a  word  which  does 
so.  Different  nations  have  fixed  upon  various  organs 
of  the  body,  such  as  the  bowels,  the  liver,  and  the 
heart,  as  the  seat  of  emotion.  It  is  mischievous 
in  cases  of  the  kind  to  aim  at  a  literal  translation, 
and  the  Authorised  Version  has  erred  considerably 
in  this  respect.  So  has  it,  I  may  add,  in  a  kindred 
point — that  of  giving  literal  renderings  of  words  and 
phrases,  which,  though  not  offensive  to  Oriental 
taste,  are  extremely  so  when  transferred,  just  as 
they  stand  in  the  original,  into  our  language.  I 
may  refer  for  an  example  to  Gen.  xxxiv.  30,  and 
especially  to  i  Sam.  xxv.  22,  and  similar  pas- 
sages. In  such  cases,  a  literal  translation  is  the 
most  unfaithful  of  all  translations.  Indelicacy 
might  easily  be  avoided,  while  the  sense  is 
preserved ;  and,  if  thought  necessary,  the  literal 
meaning  of  the  Hebrew  might  be  placed  on  the 
margin,  but  it  certainly  ought  not  to  appear  in  the 
text. 


OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 


Haggai  ii.  7.  It  is  with  no  small  reluctance  that 
we  find  it  necessary  to  relinquish  the  beautiful 
expression,  "the  Desire  of  all  nations,"  which  occurs 
in  this  verse.  That  title  seems  so  exactly  descrip- 
tive of  Christ,  and  is  so  familiar  to  us  in  connection 
with  Him  as  the  long-expected  Saviour,  that  we 
would  fain  retain*  it  if  w^e  could.  But  it  is  simply 
an  impossible  rendering  of  the  original.  Almost 
every  scholar  of  repute  admits  that  such  is  the  case, 
and  the  verse  must  be  translated  as  follows  : — 

**  And  I  will  shake  all  nations, 

And  the  choice  things  of  all  nations  shall  come  [to  this  house], 
And  I  will  fill  this  house  with  glory, 
Saith  the  Lord  of  hosts, " 

Zechariah  xi.  13.  This  is  a  most  difficult  passage, 
when  viewed  in  connection  with  its  quotation  by 
St.  Matthew,  chap,  xxvii.  9.  The  evangelist  departs 
widely  both  from  the  Hebrew  and  the  Septuagint, 
and  evidently  quoted  the  passage  in  a  loose  sort 
of  way  from  memory.  Recent  critics  change  the 
vowel  pointing  of  the  Hebrew,  and  thus  exclude  all 
mention  of  "the  potter"  from  the  passage.  "  Here," 
says  Dr.  Samuel  Davidson,  "  we  should  read, — 

•'  *  And  Jehovah  said  unto  me, 
Cast  it  into  the  treasury, 

The  splendid  price  at  which  I  was  valued  by  them. 
So  I  took  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver, 
And  cast  them  into  the  treasury  in  the  house  of  Jehovah. 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.     89 

He  adds,  "A  potter  has  no  connection  with  the 
temple.  By  changing  the  last  vowel  of  the  word 
so  rendered,  we  get  the  treasury,  which  is  unques- 
tionably correct.  The  word  potter,  however,  has 
got  into  the  passage  as  cited  by  St.  Matthew ; 
and  not  only  so,  but  field  along  with  it.  This  is 
peculiar  adaptation,  containing  a  departure  both 
from  the  Septuagint  and  the  Hebrew."  ^*  The 
passage  well  illustrates  what  I  have  said  elsewhere 
as  to  the  uncertainty  sometimes  caused  by  the  fact 
that  the  vowels  were  not  originally  written  in  the 
Hebrew  text,  and  also  as  to  the  manner  in  which  quo- 
tations are  sometimes  made  by  the  New  Testament 
writers,  t 

Malachi  iii.  i.  A  very  simple  but  important  cor- 
rection requires  to  be  made  in  this  verse.  Where 
"messenger"  occurs  the  second  time,  we  should 
read  "  angel ;  "  and  the  passage  will  therefore  stand 
thus :  "  Behold,  I  send  my  messenger,  and  he  shall 
prepare  the  way  before  me  ;  and  the  Lord  whom 
ye  seek  shall  suddenly  come  to  His  temple,  even 
the  Angel  of  the  covenant,  whom  ye  delight  in; 
behold,  He  cometh,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts."  In 
connection  with  this  change,  the  following  excellent 
remarks  should  be  considered  :   "  From  a  very  early 


*  Rev.  of  the  Eng.  Old  Test.,  p.  62. 
f  See  chaps,  i.,  vii.,  ix. 


90  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

period  we  find  mention  of  an  extraordinary  Messen- 
ger, or  Angel,  who  is  sometimes  called  the  Angel 
of  God  J  at  others,  the  Angel  of  Jehovah.  He  is 
represented  as  the  Mediator  between  the  invisible 
God  and  men  in  all  God's  communications  and 
dealings  with  men.  To  this  Angel,  divine  names, 
attributes,  purposes,  and  acts  are  ascribed.  He 
occasionally  assumed  a  human  form,  as  in  His  inter- 
views with  Hagar,  Abraham,  Jacob,  Joshua,  Gideon, 
Manoah,  and  his  wife.  He  went  before  the  camp 
of  Israel  on  the  night  of  the  exodus.  In  Exodus 
xxiii.  20,  Jehovah  said,  **  Behold,  I  send  an  angel 
before  thee,  to  bring  thee  into  the  place  which  I 
have  prepared.  My  name  is  in  him."  In  Isaiah 
Ixiii.  9,  he  is  called  the  Angel  of  His  presence,  ox  face, 
where  there  is  a  reference  to  Exod.  xxxiii.  14,  15, 
where  Jehovah  said  to  Moses,  **  My  presence  (or 
Hebrew,  My  face)  shall  go  with  thee,  and  Moses 
said.  If  Thy  face  go  not  with  us,  carry  us  not  up 
hence."  He  is  called  the  face  of  God,  because, 
though  no  man  can  see  His  face  and  live,  yet  the 
Angel  of  His  face  is  the  brightness  of  His  glory,  and 
the  express  image  of  His  person.  In  Him  Jehovah's 
presence  is  manifested,  and  His  glory  reflected ; 
for  the  glory  of  God  shines  in  the  face  of  Jesus 
Christ.  There  is  thus  a  gradual  development  in  the 
Old  Testament  of  the  doctrine  of  the  incarnation, 
of  the  distinction  of  persons  in  the  Godhead,  not 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.    91 

brought  to  light  fully,  lest  it  should  interfere  with 
the  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  God."  "^^ 

Taking  these  facts  into  account,  we  seem  not  only 
justified,  but  required,  to  translate  as  above  by 
"Angel  of  the  Covenant,"  in  order  to  indicate  the 
identity  of  the  Person  referred  to  with  Him  who, 
under  similar  appellations,  is  so  often  set  before 
us  in  other  passages  of  the  Old  Testament. 

*  Lange's     Commentary^    in    loc.     (edited    by    Dr.    Schaff. 
Malachiy  by  Dr.  Packard), 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE    HAGIOGRAPHA.— CORRECTIONS    OF    THE 
AUTHORISED    VERSION. 

HERE  again,  nothing  more  can  be  attempted 
than  to  bring  forward  some  of  the  more 
striking  specimens  of  those  alterations  and  improve- 
ments which  require  to  be  made  in  our  current 
English  translation.  And  in  doing  so,  the  books  of 
Psalms,  Job,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  and  Daniel  will, 
in  this  chapter,  briefly  attract  our  consideration. 

The  Book  of  Psalms  is,  upon  the  whole,  very  well 
translated.  Many  felicities  of  rendering  occur  in  it, 
which  ought  to  be  scrupulously  preserved,  even 
though  it  may  be  possible  to  make  a  somewhat 
closer  approach  to  the  meaning  of  the  original. 
Who  could  bear  to  have  the  beautiful  words  of  Ps. 
i.  3,  "  He  shall  be  like  a  tree  planted  by  the  rivers 
of  water,"  exchanged  for  *'  He  shall  be  like  a  tree 
planted  by  the  watercourses,"  or  the  striking  state- 
ment of  Ps.  xlvi.  5,  **  God  shall  help  her,  and  that 
right  early,"   altered   into  "God  shall   help  her  at 


94  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

the  turning  of  the  morning "  ?  The  Psalms  are, 
next  to  the  Gospels,  that  portion  of  Scripture  which 
has  most  securely  taken  possession  of  the  hearts  of 
readers,  and  the  renderings  of  the  book  with  which 
we  have  become  familiar  ought  not,  if  possible,  to 
be  disturbed.  Still,  there  are  cases  in  which  faith- 
fulness to  the  original  demands  correction,  and  to 
some  of  these  our  attention  will  now  be  directed. 

Psalm  ii.  12.  There  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  the 
Messianic  character  of  this  psalm.  That  is  abun- 
dantly plain  from  its  own  internal  structure,  as 
well  as  from  the  use  which  is  made  of  it  in  the 
New  Testament  (Acts  iv.  25,  etc.).  But  we  must 
not  on  that  account  press  for  Messianic  allusions, 
where  the  language  does  not  naturaUy  bear  such  an 
interpretation.  Now,  I  do  not  think  that  the  trans- 
lation found  in  ver.  12,  **Kiss  the  Son,  lest  He  be 
angry,"  is  a  correct  representation  of  the  original. 
Several  reasons  might  be  assigned  for  this  con- 
clusion. Of  these  I  shall  only  mention  one  which 
will  be  obvious  to  the  English  reader,  that  it  is 
the  Lord  who  is  the  subject  of  the  passage,  and  that 
it  is  most  improbable  that  a  different  person  should 
here  be  introduced.  In  accordance,  therefore,  with 
the  tenor  of  the  passage  itself,  and  with  the  ancient 
interpretations  of  it,  we  should  read  it  as  follows : — 

10.    *'  Be  wise  now,  therefore,  O  ye  kings  : 
Be  instructed,  ye  judges  of  the  earth. 


CORRECTIONS   OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.    95 

11.  Serve  the  Lord  with  fear, 
And  rejoice  with  trembling, 

12.  Worship  purely,  lest  He  be  angry,  and  ye  perish  from 

the  way  ; 
For  quickly  will  His  anger  be  kindled."* 

Psalm  xvi.  i — 4.  Every  reader  has  probably  noticed 
the  obscurity  which  surrounds  this  passage  as  it 
stands  in  the  Authorised  Version     It  is  as  follows : — 

1.  **  Preserve  me,  O  God  :  for  in  Thee  do  I  put  my  trust. 

2.  O  my  soul,  thou  hast  said  unto  the  Lord,  Thou  art  my 

Lord  : 
My  goodness  extendeth  not  to  thee  j 

3.  But  to  the  saints  that  are  in  the  earth, 

And  to  the  excellent,  in  whom  is  all  my  delight. 

4.  Their  sorrows  shall  be  multiplied  that  hasten  after  another 

god: 
Their  drink  offerings  of  blood  will  I  not  offer, 
Nor  take  up  their  names  into  my  lips." 

The   unsatisfactory  character   of  this   translation 

*  "While  agreeing  with  Dr.  S.  Davidson  as  to  the  change  of 
translation  required  in  this  psalm,  I  regret  that  he  denies,  surely 
against  very  strong  evidence,  its  Messianic  character.  He  says  . 
*'  This  psalm  is  quoted  in  the  New  Testament,  and  applied 
to  Messiah  by  the  early  Christian  disciples  in  Jerusalem  (Acts 
iv.  25)  ;  by  Paul  (Acts  xiii.  33)  ;  and  by  the  writer  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (i.  5).  We  may  therefore  presume  that 
it  was  the  current  interpretation  of  the  day.  Yet  internal 
evidence  is  against  the  exposition."  (^Introd.  to  the  Old  Test.,  ii. 
281.)  His  view  of  this  psalm  seems  to  have  influenced  the 
judgment  which  he  expresses  regarding  Daniel  ix.  25,  in  his 
Rez'ision  of  the  English  Old  Testament,  p.  54, 


96  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

is  admitted  by  every  scholar.  But  the  greatest 
difficulty  is  felt  in  replacing  it  by  something  better. 
Upon  the  whole,  the  following  version  of  the 
passage  seems  to  me  as  near  an  approach  to  the 
meaning  as  can  be  reached  : — 

1.  "  Preserve  me,  O  God  :  for  in  Thee  do  I  put  my  trust. 

2.  I  have  said  unto  the  Lord,  Thou  art  my  Lord  ; 
My  prosperity  is  not  above  (independent  of)  Thee  : 

3.  To  the  saints  [also]  who  are  in  the  land  [I  have  said  the 

same]. 
And  to  the  noble,  in  whom  is  all  my  delight. 

4.  Their  sorrows  shall  be  multiplied,  who  hasten  elsewhere  ; 
I  will  not  pour  out  their  drink  offerings  of  blood, 

And  will  not  take  their  names  upon  my  lips." 

The  obvious  intention  of  the  psalmist  is  to  place 
in  the  strongest  possible  contrast  his  own  conduct 
in  making  Jehovah  the  only  object  of  his  trust,  to 
that  of  others  who  had  recourse  to  the  worship  of 
idols.  According  to  the  translation  given  above, 
he  declares  both  to  God  and  man — to  Jehovah  in 
heaven,  and  to  the  saints  on  earth,  that  his  choice 
was  decisively  made,  and  that  he  would  have  nothing 
whatever  to  do  with  those  false  gods  in  whom  others 
trusted.  A  coherent  meaning  seems  thus  imparted 
to  the  verses.  But  the  passage  has  been  the  despair 
of  interpreters,  and  a  great  variety  of  renderings 
still  strive  for  acceptance  at  the  present  day. 

Psalm  xix.  i — 4.  It  seems  preferable  to  strike 
out  the   supplementary  adverb   here  inserted  in  the 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.     97 

Authorised    Version,    and   to   read   the   passage   as 
follows : — 

1.  *'  The  heavens  declare  the  glory  of  God, 
And  the  firmament  showeth  His  handiwork. 

2.  Day  unto  day  uttereth  speech, 

And  night  unto  night  showeth  knowledge. 

3.  There  is  no  S[)eech  and  no  language  : 
Their  voice  is  not  heard  :  [yet] 

4.  Their  line  is  gone  out  through  all  the  earth, 
And  their  words  to  the  end  of  the  world." 

The  meaning  of  ver.  3,  when  thus  translated,  is 
that  nature  utters  no  audible  voice,  but  yet,  without 
any  words,  powerfully  proclaims  her  lessons  to  the 
reflecting  mind.  The  idea,  in  short,  is  just  that  so 
b"eautifully  expressed  by  Addison,  when  he  says 
respecting  the  orbs  of  heaven, — 

*'  In  reason! s  ear  they  all  rejoice. 
And  u  tter  forth  a  glorious  voice^ 
For  ever  singing,  as  they  shine, 
'  The  hand  that  made  us  is  divine.'  " 

Psalm  xxiv.  6.  There  is  an  obvious  incongruity 
in  this  verse,  as  it  stands  in  the  Authorised  Version, — 

"  This  is  the  generation  of  them  that  seek  him, 
That  seek  thy  face,  O  Jacob." 

The  second  line  should  either  be  read  thus, — 

That  seek  Thy  face,  [of  the  house  of]  Jacob ; 

or, 

That  seek  Thy  face,  [O  God  of]  Jacob. 


98  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

Psalm  Ixxxiv.  4 — 7.  This  passage  should  be  cor- 
rected as  follows : — 

4.  "  Blessed  are  they  that  dwell  in  Thy  house; 
Continually  do  they  praise  Thee.     Pause. 

5.  Blessed  is  the  man  whose  strength  is  in  Thee, 
Whose  thoughts  are  of  the  pilgrim -ways. 

6.  Passing  through  the  valley  of  weeping, 
They  make  it  a  place  of  fountains  ; 

Yea,  the  early  rain  covers  it  with  blessings. 

7.  They  go  from  strength  to  strength  : 

They  appear  [at  length]  before  God  in  Zion." 

Psalm  cxxiv.  3.  The  word  "quick"  is  very  apt 
to  be  misunderstood  in  this  verse,  as  if  it  stood  for 
quickly.  It  really  means  alive,  as  in  Heb.  iv.  12;  and 
the  unambiguous  rendering  is,  "  Then  had  they 
swallowed  us  up  alive." 

Psalm  cxxvii.  2.  The  common  translation  of  the 
last  clause  of  this  verse  is,  "  For  so  He  giveth  His 
beloved  sleep."  But  this  seems  erroneous,  and  the 
verse  should  probably  stand  thus  : — 

*'  It  is  vain  for  you  to  rise  up  early, 
♦  And  that  ye  lie  down  late  ; 

That  ye  eat  the  bread  of  sorrows  ; 

So  giveth  He  it  to  His  beloved  sleeping." 

The  meaning  is,  that  all  the  blessings  for  which 
others  toil  so  hard  are  freely  bestowed  by  the 
Lord  upon  His  beloved,  without  effort  on  their  part, 
and  unexpectedly,  as  in  a  dream. 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.     99 

There  are  a  number  of  other  slight  improvements 
which  admit  of  being  made  in  the  common  version 
of  the  Book  of  Psalms.  But,  as  has  already  been 
suggested,  it  is,  upon  the  whole,  exceedingly  well 
translated ;  and  the  familiar  English  forms  to  which 
we  are  accustomed  in  reading  it  are  too  sacred  to 
be  lightly  tampered  with.  The  case  is  very  different 
with  the  Book  of  Job,  to  which  we  now  proceed. 
This  book  must  always  be  felt  interesting  and 
sublime,  even  in  the  worst  translation.  But  it 
certainly  is  most  obscure  and  enigmatical  in  many 
passages,  as  presented  in  our  Authorised  Version. 
I  shall  now  bring  forward  some  of  these  passages, 
leaving,  of  necessity,  many  others  unnoticed,  though 
they  perhaps  stand  equally  in  need  of  correction. 

Job  iv.,  V.  These  chapters  contain  the  first  and 
most  important  speech  of  Eliphaz.  It  is  allowed  on 
all  hands  to  be  a  masterpiece.  The  greatest  skill 
appears  in  its  composition,  when  it  is  carefully 
considered.  It  bears,  of  course,  chiefly  upon  the 
patriarch's  complaints  contained  in  the  third  chapter. 
Job's  sin  is  evidently  assumed  by  the  speaker  as  the 
only  possible  explanation  of  his  calamities,  but  the 
thought  is  not  painfully  obtruded :  there  is  a  desire 
evinced  to  spare  the  sufferer,  while  dealing  faith- 
fully with  him,  and  to  win  him  to  repentance,  rather 
by  suggesting  the  Divine  majesty  and  mercy,  than 


100  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

by  pressing  home  the  charge  of  his  own  guilt. 
The  speech  is  throughout  one  continued  climax, 
ascending  from  a  lower  to  a  higher  step  in  th3 
argument;  "rising,"  to  use  the  words  of  an  eminent 
German  critic,  "  from  the  faint  whisper  and  tune  of 
the  summer  wind  to  the  loud  and  irresistible  thunder 
of  the  wintry  storm."  The  following  is  perhaps  a 
more  adequate  translation  of  it  than  that  contained 
in  our  Authorised  Version  : — 

1.  "  Then  Eliphaz  the  Temanite  answered  and  said, 

2.  If  one  venture  on  a  word  with  thee,  wilt  thou  be  offended  ? 
But  who  can  restrain  himself  from  speaking? 

3.  Behold,  thou  hast  instructed  many, 

And  thou  hast  strengthened  the  feeble  hands. 

4.  Thy  words  have  upheld  him  that  was  tottering, 
And  thou  hast  sustained  the  sinking  knees. 

5.  But  now  it  Cometh  upon  thyself,  and  thou  faintest ; 

It  toucheth  thine  own  person,  and  thou  art  confounded. 

6.  Is  not  thy  pious  fear  thy  confidence  ? 

Thy  hope,  is  it  not  the  uprightness  of  thy  ways  ? 

7.  Think  now  :  who  ever  perished,  being  innocent? 
And  where  have  the  righteous  been  cut  off? 

8.  According  as  I  have  seen,  those  who  plough  iniquity, 
And  sow  mischief,  reap  the  same. 

9.  By  the  breath  of  God  they  perish, 

By  the  blast  of  His  anger  they  vanish  away. 

10.  The  roaring  of  the  lion,  and  the  voice  of  the  hoarse  lion, 
And  the  teeth  of  the  young  lions  are  rooted  out. 

11.  The  old  lion  perishes  for  lack  of  prey  ; 

And  the  whelps  of  the  lioness  are  scattered  abroad. 

12.  Moreover,  a  word  came  to  me  stealthily, 
And  my  ear  caught  a  whisper  thereof. 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.     loi 

13.  In  thoughts  from  the  visions  of  the  night, 
When  deep  sleep  falleth  upon  men  ; 

14.  Fear  came  upon  me,  and  trembling, 
And  caused  all  my  bones  to  shake. 

15.  Then  a  spirit  passed  before  my  face  ; 
The  hair  of  my  flesh  stood  up. 

16.  It  stood,  but  I  discei-ned  not  its  aspect  j 
A  form  was  before  mine  eyes  ; 

A  gentle  *  rustling,  and  I  heard  a  voice  ; 

17.  Is  mortal  man  more  just  than  God  ? 

Is  great  man  more  pure  than  He  who  made  him  ? 

18.  Behold,  He  trusteth  not  in  His  servants. 
And  His  angels  He  chargeth  with  folly  j 

19.  How  much  more  them  that  dwell  in  houses  of  clay. 
The  foundation  of  which  is  in  the  dust ! 

They  are  crushed  before  the  moth. 

20.  From  morning  till  evening  they  are  broken  in  pieces  : 
Utterly  unnoticed,  they  perish  for  ever. 

21.  Doth  not  their  glory  pass  away  with  them? 
They  die,  and  not  in  wisdom. 

V.   I.  Call  now  !     Does  any  one  answer  thee  ? 

And  to  which  of  the  holy  ones  dost  thou  turn  ? 

2.  For  grief  slays  the  foolish  man, 
And  envy  destroys  the  simple. 

3.  I  myself  saw  a  fool  taking  root. 
But  speedily  I  cursed  his  habitation. 

4.  His  children  were  far  from  safety, 

And  were  crushed  in  the  gate,  with  none  to  deliver  them. 

5.  His  hai-vest  did  the  hungry  man  eat, 

And  took  it  even  from  within  the  enclosures, 
While  greedy  robbers  swallowed  up  his  M^ealth. 

6.  For  trouble  cometh  not  forth  from  the  dust, 
Nor  does  affliction  spring  out  of  the  ground  ; 

*  Exactly — "  Scarce  more  than  silence  is,  and  yet  a  sound." — 

The  Spanish  Student,  by  Longfellow. 


I02  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION, 

7.  But  man  is  born  unto  sorrow, 
Even  as  the  sparks  fly  upward. 

8.  Truly  I  would  seek  unto  God, 

And  to  God  would  I  commit  my  cause, 

9.  Who  doeth  great  things  beyond  all  search, 
Yea,  marvellous  things  without  number  j 

10.  Who  giveth  rain  upon  the  earth, 
And  sendeth  waters  upon  the  fields  : 

11.  To  set  up  on  high  those  that  are  low ; 
And  the  mourning  are  exalted  to  safety. 

12.  He  bringeth  to  nought  the  devices  of  the  crafty, 

So  that  their  hands  cannot  accomplish  their  purpose  ; 

13.  He  taketh  the  wise  in  their  own  craftiness, 

And  the  counsel  of  the  cunning  is  hurried  to  ruin. 

14.  Even  by  day  they  stumble  in  darkness, 
And  at  noonday  they  grope  as  in  the  night. 

15.  And  he  saveth  from  the  sword,  from  their  mouth. 
Yea  from  the  hand  of  the  mighty — the  poor. 

16.  So  to  the  feeble  arises  hope  ; 
And  iniquity  shutteth  her  mouth. 

17.  Lo,  blessed  is  the  man  whom  God  correcteth  ; 
Despise   not    thou,    therefore,    the   chastening   of  the 

Almighty. 

18.  For  though  He  woundeth.  He  also  bindeth  up ; 
Though  He  smiteth,  yet  His  hands  make  whole. 

19.  In  six  troubles  He  shall  deliver  thee ; 
Yea,  in  seven,  no  evil  shall  touch  thee. 

20.  In  famine,  He  shall  redeem  thee  from  death ; 
And  in  war  from  the  power  of  the  sword. 

21.  When  the  tongue  smiteth,  thou  shalt  be  hidden  ; 
And  thou  shalt  not  fear  destruction  when  it  comes« 

22.  At  devastation  and  at  famine  thou  shalt  laugh. 

And  thou  shalt  not  be  afraid  of  the  beasts  of  the  earth  ; 

23.  For  thou  art  in  covenant  with  the  stones  of  the  field, 
And  the  beasts  of  the  field  are  at  peace  with  thee. 


CORRECTIONS   OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.     103 

24.  So  shalt  thou  know  that  thy  tent  is  in  peace, 

Thou  shalt  inspect  thy  household,  and  find  nothing  gone. 

25.  Thou  shalt  know  also  that  thy  seed  shall  be  many, 
And  thine  offspring  as  the  grass  of  the  earth. 

26.  Thou  shalt  come  to  thy  grave  in  a  full  age. 
As  a  sheaf  of  corn  cometh  in  its  season. 

27.  Lo,  this  [is  the  truth]  :  we  have  closely  examined  it ; 
Thus  stands  the  case  :  O  hear  it,  and  apply  it  to  thyself." 

Job  xix.  25 — 27.  This  is  a  specially  interesting 
passage,  from  the  reference  which  it  has  usually 
been  supposed  to  contain  to  a  coming  Messiah. 
As  was  formerly  remarked  on  Gen.  xlix.  10,  it  is 
rather  a  recommendation  than  otherwise  of  the 
rendering  which  is  given  of  an  Old  Testament 
passage,  if,  when  the  words  are  naturally  and  fairly 
translated,  they  are  found  to  be  of  a  Messianic 
character.  In  the  present  case,  I  have  no  doubt 
as  to  the  reference ;  and  I  think  the  following  a 
pretty  correct  representation  of  the  original : — 

25.  **  For  I  know  that  my  Redeemer  liveth. 

And  that  He  shall  stand  hereafter  upon  the  dust ; 

26.  And  though  after  my  skin,  this  [body]  is  destroyed, 
Yet  out  of  my  flesh  shall  I  see  God  ; 

27.  Whom  I  shall  see  for  myself, 

And  mine  eyes  shall  behold  Him,  and  not  another : 
My  veins  faint  with  longing  within  me." 

It  is  not  to  be  denied  that  much  uncertainty  exists 
as  to  the  exact  meaning  of  this  passage.  The  only 
point  of  which  I  am  fully  persuaded   is  that  it  is 


104  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

Messianic  in  character.  When  it  was  uttered,  the 
speaker  was  evidently  in  a  state  of  high  spiritual 
exultation.  He  had  entered  that  region  of  unde- 
fined yet  glorious  hope,  which  was,  from  time  to 
time,  penetrated  by  the  Old  Testament  saints. 
They  saw  that  a  great  Deliverer  was  to  come; 
and  however  vague  the  notions  respecting  Him  to 
which  they  attained,  they  foand  enough  in  these  to 
lift  them  above  present  sufferings,  and  convey  the 
strongest  consolation  to  their  hearts.  So  it  was 
with  Job  on  this  occasion.  He  now  got  a  glimpse 
of  his  future  Redeemer,  and  of  the  close  relation  in 
which  he  himself  stood  to  that  great  and  gracious 
Being,  which  filled  his  soul,  for  the  moment,  with 
ecstatic  delight,  and  prevented  him  from  ever  again 
sinking  into  those  depths  of  misery  and  despair, 
of  which  he  had  previously  had  so  painful  an 
experience. 

Job  xxxiii.  23,  24.  This  passage  also  is  a  peculiarly 
interesting  one,  for  the  same  reason  as  that  which 
has  just  been  considered.  Here,  again,  we  appear 
to  be  admitted  within  the  circle  of  those  Messianic 
ideas,  which  seem,  unquestionably,  -to  have  been 
disseminated  among  the  Semitic  peoples  at  a  very 
early  date.  The  proper  translation  of  the  passage 
appears  to  be  as  follows ;  but  it  is  right  to  state  that 
the  greatest  diversity  of  opinion  prevails  among 
scholars  on  the  subject : — 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED   VERSION,     105 

23.  **  If  there  is  for  him  an  angel,  a  mediator, 
One  from  among  a  thousand, 

To  declare  unto  man  that  which  is  right, 

24.  Then  will  He  be  gracious  unto  him,  and  say, 
Deliver  him  from  going  down  into  the  pit  ; 

I  have  found  a  ransom." 

It  is  obvious  that  there  is  much  vagueness  about 
the  ideas  here  expressed.  But  it  is  also,  I  think, 
evident  that  the  germs  of  evangelical  truth  exist  in 
the  passage.  And  if  a  primitive  revelation  of  a 
coming  Saviour  was  indeed  made  to  mankind,  we 
should  expect  it  to  be  wrapped,  for  a  long  time,  in 
obscurity,  and  only  to  grow  in  clearness  with  suc- 
ceeding generations.  All  the  doctrines  of  Scripture 
have  had  a  history^  coming  home  to  the  human  con- 
sciousness very  dimly  at  first,  but  being  evolved  and 
brought  into  prominence  with  the  lapse  of  time. 
The  Book  of  Job,  in  particular,  seems  to  abound  in 
those  seminal  thoughts  which  were  developed  and 
exhibited  clearly  in  the  later  books  of  Scripture. 

Job  xxxvi.  29 — 33.  As  this  passage  stands  in  the 
Authorised  Version,  it  seems  perfectly  unintelligible. 
It  runs, — 

29.  «*  Also  can  any  understand  the  spreadings  of  the  clouds, 
Or  the  noise  of  His  tabernacle  ? 

30.  Behold,  He  spreadeth  His  light  upon  it, 
And  covereth  the  bottom  of  the  sea. 

31.  For  by  them  judgeth  He  the  people ; 
He  giveth  meat  in  abundance. 


io6  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

32.  With  clouds  He  covereth  the  light  j 
And  commandeth  it  not  to  shine 
By  the  cloud  that  cometh  betwixt. 

33.  The  noise  thereof  showeth  concerning  it, 
The  cattle  also  concerning  the  vapour." 

No  word  need  be  said  to  prove  that  this  cannot 
be  the  correct  translation,  since  it  is,  in  fact,  little 
better  than  nonsense.  But  there  is  very  great  diffi- 
culty in  proposing  anything  satisfactory  in  its  place. 
I  diffidently  suggest  the  following : — 

29.  "  And  can  any  understand  the  outspreading  of  the  clouds, 
Or  the  fearful  thunderings  in  His  pavilion  ? 

30.  B.ehold,  He  flashes  His  lightnings  over  it, 
While  He  darkeneth  the  abysses  of  the  sea. 

31.  For  by  these  means  He  ruleth  the  nations, 

By  these  also  He  provides  food  in  abundance ; 

32.  With  His  hands  He  covereth  the  lightning, 
And  commandeth  it  where  to  strike. 

33.  He  pointeth  out  to  it  His  friends ; 
His  wrath  collects  over  the  wicked." 

This  last  verse  is  most  variously  interpreted ;  and 
its  difficulty  will  be  apparent  to  the  reader,  when  the 
following  version  of  it  is  set  before  him,  as  equally 
probable  with  that  given  above: — 

**  His  thundering  announces  Him  : 
The  cattle  even  [tell]  of  His  approach.*' 

Prov.  viii.  22 — 31.  This  is  perhaps  the  most  inte- 
resting and  important  passage  in  the  whole  Book  of 


CORRECTIONS   OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.     107 

Proverbs.  It  is  very  fairly  rendered  in  our  common 
version,  but  is  well  worthy  of  an  attempt  at  a  still 
more  exact  translation.  I  venture  to  give  it  as 
follows : — 

22.  *'  The  Lord  created  me  as  the  beginning  of  His  way, 
Before  His  works  of  old. 

23.  I  was  set  up  from  everlasting, 

From  the  beginning,  before  the  foundation  of  the  earth. 

24.  While  as  yet  there  were  no  depths,  I  was  brought  forth, 
While  there  were  no  fountains  abounding  with  water. 

25.  Before  the  mountains  were  settled, 
Before  the  hills  was  I  brought  forth  ; 

26.  While  as  yet  He  had  not  made  earth  and  plains, 
And  the  first  of  the  dust  of  the  world. 

27.  When  He  prepared  the  heavens,  I  was  there. 
When  He  set  a  compass  over  the  face  of  the  deep, 

28.  When  He  established  the  clouds  above, 

When  the  fountains  of  the  deep  violently  burst  forth  ; 

29.  When  He  gave  to  the  sea  its  decree, 

That  the  waters  should  not  pass  over  their  bounds, 
When  He  appointed  the  foundations  of  the  earth, 

30.  Then  was  I  beside  Him  as  the  worker, 
And  was  His  delight  day  by  day. 
While  I  rejoiced  before  Him  continually, 

31.  Rejoicing  in  the  habitable  part  of  His  earth, 
And  my  delights  were  with  the  sons  of  men.' 

Two  extreme  views  have  been  taken  of  the  mean- 
ing of  this  passage.  Some  have  found  in  it  as  clear 
a  revelation  of  the  Logos  doctrine  as  that  which  is 
contained  in  the  New  Testament.  But  this  is  absurd, 
and  contrary  to  the  whole  analogy  of  Scripture.     As 


io8  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

has  been  already  remarked,  every  doctrine  has  been 
marked  by  growth  and  development;  and,  as  the 
very  opening  of  this  passage  shows,  the  writer  had 
only  an  imperfect  conception  of  the  truth  afterwards 
revealed.  All  Hebrew  scholars  agree  at  the  present 
day,  that  the  word  in  ver.  22,  translated  **  possessed  " 
in  our  English  version,  must  have  the  meaning 
"  created  "  given  it ;  and  this  is  out  of  harmony  with 
the  Logos  doctrine,  as  taught  by  St.  John  and  other 
writers  of  the  New  Testament.  But,  on  the  other 
hand,  some  have  seen  in  this  passage  nothing  more 
than  a  personification  of  Divine  wisdom.  This  is 
clearly  to  fall  short  of  the  meaning,  as  several  ex- 
pressions show.  The  word  translated  **set  up"  in 
ver.  23  might  perhaps  be  rendered  "was  conse- 
crated ; "  and  a  vague  personal  reference,  at  least, 
would  then  suggest  itself  to  the  reader.  But  this  is 
far  more  obvious  and  certain  in  ver.  31,  where  the 
acts  of  rejoicing  and  delighting  spoken  of  point  un- 
mistakably to  a  person.  The  whole  passage  is  thus 
an  adumbration  of  the  Messiah,  and  may  properly 
be  used  in  illustration  of  what  is  more  clearly  revealed 
■n  other  parts  of  Scripture  respecting  Christ. 

Prov.  xi.  16.  This  passage  is  here  referred  to,  as 
exhibiting  the  amendments  which  may  occasionally 
be  made  on  the  Hebrew  text  by  means  of  the  Greek 
version.  The  Septuagint  inserts  two  lines  which 
are  not  in  the  Hebrew ;  and,  in  the  opinion  of  the 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.     109 

best  critics,  these  lines  are  genuine.  They  have  a 
ring  of  truthfulness  and  propriety  about  them,  which 
makes  it  difficult  to  imagine  them  the  invention  of 
a  later  age.  The  reader  will  observe  how  admirably 
they  complete  the  parallelism  : — 

'*  A  gracious  woman  acquireth  honour, 
[But  a  seat  of  disgrace  is  she  that  hateth  righteousness  ; 
The  idle  become  destitute  of  substance,] 
But  the  diligent  acquire  riches." 

It  may  be  observed,  generally,  that  the  Hebrew 
text  of  the  Book  of  Proverbs  is  in  a  most  unsatis- 
factory state.  Nor  can  much  be  done  for  it,  till 
critical  editions  of  the  ancient  versions  are  acces- 
sible. This  point  will  be  found  adverted  to  in  sub- 
sequent chapters.''* 

Ecclesiastes  xii.  i — 7.  This  is,  probably,  the  most 
striking  passage  in  the  book,  and  I  shall  here  en- 
deavour to  give  it  a  more  accurate  rendering  than 
that  which  stands  in  our  Authorised  Version. 

1.  "  Remember,  then,  thy  Creator  in  the  days  of  thy  youth  ; 
Before  the  days  of  evil  are  come,  and  the  years  draw  nigh, 
When  thou  shalt  say.  There  is  no  pleasure  in  them  : 

2.  While  the  sun,  the  dawn,  the  moon,  and  the  stars  are  not 

darkened, 
Nor  the  clouds  return  after  the  rain  : 

3.  In  the  day  when  the  keepers  of  the  house  tremble, 
And  its  strong  men  bow  themselves, 

*  See  chaps,  vii.,  viii. 


no  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION, 

And  the  grinders  fail  both  in  strength  and  numbers  j 
And  those  that  look  out  of  the  windows  are  darkened  ; 

4.  And  the  doors  on  the  street  are  shut  ; 
And  the  sound  of  the  mill  is  faintly  heard, 
Although  the  man  rises  at  the  voice  of  the  bird, 
And  all  the  daughters  of  music  are  brought  low  ; 

5.  When  he  is  afraid,  too,  of  that  which  is  high  j 
And  terrors  are  in  the  way  : 

And  the  almond  tree  blossoms  ; 

And  the  grasshopper  is  felt  a  burden  ; 

And  all  desire  fails  ; 

(For  thus  man  goeth  to  his  long  home, 

And  the  mourners  walk  about  the  streets  ;) 

6.  Before  the  silver  cord  is  loosed. 
And  the  golden  bowl  is  broken, 

And  the  pitcher  shattered  at  the  fountain, 

7.  And  the  wheel  broken  at  the  cistern  ; 
And  the  dust  returns  to  the  earth  as  it  was. 
And  the  spirit  returns  to  God  who  gave  it." 

There  is  in  this  passage  an  elaborate  and  highly 
poetical  comparison  of  the  human  body  to  a  house.* 
The  following  brief  explanation  of  the  metaphors 
employed  may  be  useful :  In  ver.  3,  "  the  keepers 
of  the  house"  appear  to  denote  the  arms,  "the 
strong  men"  the  legs,  **  the  grinders"  the  teeth, 
and  "those  that  look  out  of  the  windows"  the  eyes. 
In  ver.  4,  it  seems  best  to  regard  the  allusions 
throughout  to  be  to  the  ears.     The  sense  of  hearing 

*  The  classical  scholar  will  remember  the  striking  use  which 
the  Roman  dramatist  Plautus  makes  of  the  same  image  in  the 
Mostellai'ia,  act  i.,  sc.  2. 


CORRECTIONS   OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION,     ill 

has  grown  dull  with  age,  yet  the  voice  of  the  bird 
in  the  morning  has  power  to  awake  the  light  sleeper, 
while  no  pleasure  is  any  longer  felt  in  music.  In 
ver.  5,  "the  almond  tree,"  with  its  white  blossoms, 
denotes  the  hoariness  of  age ;  and  the  last  two 
clauses  appear  to  be  best  taken  as  a  parenthesis. 
In  ver.  6,  "  the  silver  cord "  denotes  the  thread  of 
life  ;  **  the  golden  bowl "  has  reference  to  the  body 
as  a  vessel  containing  the  life  blood ;  "the  shattered 
pitcher"  suggests,  in  particular,  the  destruction  of 
the  organs  of  respiration;  and  "the  wheel  broken 
at  the  cistern"  implies  the  cessation  of  that  cyclic 
action  by  which  life,  while  it  endures,  is  maintained. 
Finally,  in  ver.  7,  we  find  a  plain  description  of  the 
last  solemn  event,  which  has,  in  the  previous  verse, 
been  set  forth  under  such  varied  imagery. 

Daniel  ix.  24 — 27.  This  is  one  of  the  most  re- 
markable passages  in  the  Old  Testament.  As  it 
stands  in  our  Authorised  Version,  it  forms  the  very 
climax  and  crown  of  the  Messianic  predictions. 
There  is  a  definiteness  about  it  which  belongs  to 
no  other  passage,  and,  on  this  very  account,  it  has 
been  discredited  in  the  estimation  of  certain  critics. 
As  is  well  known,  the  authenticity  of  the  Book  of 
Daniel  has  been  flatly  denied  by  not  a  few  modern 
scholars.  But  it  has  also  been  most  ably  defended. 
We  are  not  here  called  upon  to  discuss  the  question  ; 


112  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 


all  we  have  to  do  with  is  the  correctness  of  the 
translation.*  Very  different  versions  of  the  passage 
before  us  have  been  proposed,  many  of  which 
completely  strip  it  of  all  reference  to  the  Messiah. 
But,  after  taking  everything  into  account,  I  venture 
to  present  the  following  as  a  fair  and  accurate  trans- 
lation of  the  verses  : — 

"Seventy  weeks  are  determined  upon  thy  people,  and  upon 
thy  holy  city,  to  finish  the  transgression,  and  to  make  an  end 
of  the  sins,  and  to  make  reconciliation  for  iniquity,  and  to  bring 
in  everlasting  righteousness,  and  to  seal  up  vision  and  prophet, 
and  to  anoint  a  thing  most  holy.  Knovi',  therefore,  and  under- 
stand, that,  from  the  going  forth  of  the  word  to  restore  and 
build  Jerusalem  unto  Messiah  Prince  shall  be  seven  weeks  ; 
and  for  sixty  and  two  weeks  it  shall  be  restored  and  built  up 
with  streets  and  walls,  yet  in  times  of  trouble.  And,  after  the 
sixty  and  two  weeks,  Messiah  shall  be  cut  off,  and  no  one  [shall 
stand]  by  Him  ;  and  the  people  of  a  prince  that  shall  come  shall 
destroy  the  city  and  the  sanctuary,  and  his  end  shall  be  in  the 
flood,  yet  war  shall  be  to  the  end,  according  to  decreed  deso- 
lations. And  He  shall  make  firm  a  covenant  with  the  many 
for  one  week,  and,  during  half  of  the  week.  He  shall  cause 
sacrifice  and  oblation  to  cease,  and  on  the  wing  of  abominations 
shall  make  desolate,  even  till  the  end,  and  till  the  appointed 
judgment  shall  be  poured  upon  the  desolator." 

*  While  not  entering  on  the  question  of  authenticity,  the 
words  of  Havernick  may  be  quoted  :  "The  book  appears  in 
a  collection  which  contains  no  other  prophet.  Hence  we  con- 
clude that  this  position  was  assigned  to  the  prophet  deliberately. 
Were  the  book  an  interpolated  one,  it  would,  doubtless,  have 
been  smuggled  into  the  collection  of  the  prophets."  (Quoted  by 
Auberlen,  Daniel,  etc.,  p.  26.) 


CORRECTIONS  OF  AUTHORISED    VERSION.     113 

I  do  not,  of  course,  enter  upon  any  exposition 
of  this  most  striking  passage.  Comments  without 
number  have  been  written  upon  it,  and  many  dif- 
ferent views  have  been  expressed  as  to  its  import. 
After  a  careful  consideration  of  the  chief  of  these, 
and  after  endeavouring  to  translate  the  original 
as  accurately  as  possible,  I  must  here  be  content  to 
say,  that  no  interpretation  seems  to  me  to  do  justice 
to  the  meaning  of  the  passage,  which  does  not 
admit  its  Messianic  character. 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE  APOCRYPHAL  BOOKS  OF  THE  OLD 
TESTAMENT. 

IT  is  to  be  regretted,  in  several  respects,  that  the 
Apocryphal  books  of  the  Old  Testament  have 
been  so  little  read  in  this  country.  Many  of  them 
abound  in  excellent  matter.  To  these  books  indeed, 
more  justly  than  to  the  work  which  drew  forth  the 
words,  may  the  saying  be  applied,  that  if  in  them 
the  silvery  peal  of  inspiration  is  no  longer  heard,  its 
vibration  still  lingers  in  the  air,  and  serves  both  to 
charm  the  ear  and  delight  the  heart.  Reference  will 
be  mcfde  to  some  of  these  striking  and  edifying 
passages  in  the  sequel ;  while  it  must,  at  the  same 
time,  be  acknowledged,  that  not  a  little  of  the  con- 
tents of  the  Apocryphal  books  is  of  the  most  puerile 
character,  and  utterly  unworthy  of  being  set  side  by 
side  with  the  canonical  Scriptures. 

But,  besides  the  intrinsic  excellence  of  much  of 
the  Apocrypha,  it  has  a  special  value  as  forming  a 
connecting  link  between  the  Old  and  New  Testaments. 
The  literature  of  the  several  books  reflects  the  feel- 
ings which  prevailed  among  the  Jews  during  those 


Ii6  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

centuries  which  elapsed  between  the  return  from 
the  captivity  and  the  advent  of  Christ;  while  the 
history  which  some  of  them  contains,  fills  up  what 
must  otherwise  have  been  little  better  than  a  blank 
in  Israelitish  history.  From  the  almost  total  neglect 
of  the  Apocrypha  which  has  prevailed  in  Britain, 
many  even  of  the  educated  and  intelligent  classes 
among  us  have  but  a  very  vague  and  confused  notion 
of  its  contents,  and  consequently  are  but  slightly 
acquainted  with  the  fortunes  and  feelings  of  the 
Jewish  people  between  the  times  of  Nehemiah  and 
Christ.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  revision  of  the 
text  and  translation  of  the  Apocrypha,  which,  it  is 
understood,  will  be  added  to  the  revised  version  of 
the  Old  arid  New  Testaments,  may  attract  to  it  many 
more  readers,  and  thus  lead  to  a  more  general 
acquaintance  with  a  very  interesting  and  stirring 
period  in  the  history  of  the  Jews. 

The  following  is  a  list  of  the  books  which  are 
generally  reckoned  as  constituting  the  Apocrypha*  of 
the  Old  Testament : — 

1.  The  First  Book  of  Esdras, 

2.  The  Second  Book  of  Esdras. 

*  There  is  no  doubt  that  Apocrypha  is  a  Greek  wor/d, 
meaning  "  hidden,"  but  it  is  not  easy  to  explain  how  this  came 
to  acquire  the  sense  of  sptrious.  See  the  various  explanations 
in  Smith's  Did.  of  Bible ^  art.  Apocrypha. 


APOCRYPHAL  BOOKS  OF  OLD  TESTAMENT.     117 

3.  The  Book  of  Tobit. 
3.  The  Book  of  Judith. 

5.  Additions  to  the  Book  of  Esther. 

6.  The  Book  of  Wisdom. 

7.  Ecclesiasticus,  or,  the  Book  of  the  Son  of 
Sirach. 

8.  The  Book  of  Baruch. 

9.  Additions  to  the  Book  of  Daniel. 
ID.  The  Prayer  of  Manasseh. 

11.  The  First  Book  of  Maccabees. 

12.  The  Second  Book  of  Maccabees. 

I  shall  now  give  a  brief  account  of  these  books 
separately,  with  any  remarks  which  they  may 
naturally  draw  forth,  and  then  say  a  few  words  with 
respect  to  the  Apocrypha  as  a  whole. 

I .  The  First  Book  of  Esdras  is  called  the  third  in 
Article  VI.  of  the  Church  of  England,  because  the 
Latin  Bible  has  there  been  followed.  In  the  Vul- 
gate, the  canonical  books  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  are 
styled  First  and  Second  Esdras  respectively,  and 
hence  the  book  with  which  we  have  now  to  deal 
is  called  the  third.  The  general  object  of  this 
book  is  to  give  an  account  of  the  restoration  of  the 
Temple.  Its  most  important  and  only  independent 
portion  is  comprised  in  chaps,  iii. — v.  6.  This  section 
embraces  a  discussion  of  the  question  as  to  what  is 
mightiest.     The  decision  is  at  last  given  in  favour  of 


ii8  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

Truth;  and  there  is  a  noble  passage  (chap.  iv. 
38 — ^41)  to  the  following  effect :  "  As  for  the  truth,  it 
endureth,  and  is  always  strong ;  and  it  liveth  and 
ruleth  for  evermore.  With  her  there  is  no  accepting 
of  persons  or  making  of  distinctions  ;  but  she  doeth 
the  things  that  are  just,  and  refraineth  from  all  unjust 
and  wicked  things ;  and  all  men  take  pleasure  in  her 
works,  and  there  is  nothing  unrighteous  in  her  judg- 
ment. And  she  is  the  strength,  and  the  kingdom, 
and  the  power,  and  the  majesty  of  all  ages.  Blessed 
be  the  God  of  truth.  And  he  ceased  from  speaking, 
And  thereupon  all  the  people  shouted,  and  then 
said.  Great  is  truth,  and  mighty  above  all  things." 
It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  the  last  clause  of  this 
passage  has  given  rise  to  the  oft-quoted  proverb, 
**  Magna  est  Veritas,  et  praevalebit."  Many  make  use 
of  that  saying,  who  have  not  the  least  idea  whence  it 
is  derived.  As  the  clause  stands  in  the  Latin  version, 
it  runs  thus,  "  IMagna  est  Veritas  et  prcEvalet^^  and 
this  is  an  exact  rendering  of  the  Greek  original. 
But  in  some  Y\^ay  or  other,  and  as  if  to  indicate  that 
Truth  has  generally  to  wait  a  considerable  time  for 
victory,  the  present  has  been  exchanged  for  the 
future,  so  that  for  prcEvalet  we  invariably  find  prcB- 
valehit. 

Apart  from  the  independent  and  original  part  of 
the  book  just  noticed,  the  statements  which  it  con^ 
tains   are    exceedingly   confused    and   inconsistent, 


APOCRYPHAL  BOOKS  OF  OLD  TESTAMENT.     119 

besides  being  hopelessly  irreconcilable  with  those 
of  the  canonical  Scriptures.  Josephus,  however, 
attached  importance  to  them,  and  makes  no  small 
use  of  the  book.  Its  author  was  probably  a  Jew 
of  Palestine,  and  its  original  language  Greek, 
though  some  writers  have  brought  forward  objec- 
tions to  both  these  opinions.  The  period  of  its 
composition  cannot  be  definitely  fixed,  but  may 
confidently  be  placed  in  the  first  or  second "  century 
before  Christ. 

It  must  be  regarded  as  a  strange  fact,  that  the 
Church  of  Rome,  while  embracing  so  many  of  the 
books  of  the  Apocrypha  in  the  canon  of  Scripture, 
by  a  decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  excluded  this 
Book  of  Esdras.  Certainly,  several  others  were  pro- 
nounced canonical,  which  seem  to  have  much  weaker 
claims  to  be  so  recognised  than  this  one.  Probably 
the  reason  for  its  exclusion  was  twofold ;  first,  that 
Jerome  has  spoken  disparagingly  of  it,  and  secondly, 
that  the  Council  did  not  know  of  its  existence  in  the 
Greek  language. 

2.  The  Second  Book  of  Esdras  is  styled  the  fourth 
in  the  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England,  for  the 
reason  indicated  above.  This  book  belongs  to  the 
Jewish  Apocalyptic  literature.  It  is  to  be  reckoned 
with  such  productions  as  the  Book  of  Enoch 
(Jude    14).       Both    contain    professed    revelations, 


120  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

though  of  a  very  different  character.  The  Book  of 
Enoch  is  jubilant  and  exulting,  while  second  Esdras 
is  gloomy  in  the  extreme.  Neither  book  was  of  old 
admitted  into  the  canon  of  Scripture,  and  both  have 
been  rejected  in  modern  times,  alike  by  Catholics 
and  Protestants. 

This  Second  Book  of  Esdras  contains  a  number 
of  visions  referring  to  the  Messiah.  By  means  of 
these  we  approximate  towards  the  date  of  the  book, 
which  may  be  somewhat  doubtfully  fixed  about  the 
last  decade  of  the  first  century  of  our  era.  Its 
original  language  was  certainly  Greek,  but  it  is  now 
known  only  through  five  ancient  versions, — Latin, 
Syriac,  ^thiopic,  Arabic,  and  Armenian.  The 
multitude  of  these  early  translations  of  the  book 
testifies  to  its  great  popularity  in  the  primitive 
Church ;  and  while  it  has  always  been  excluded 
from  the  canon,  it  is  still  numbered  in  our  own 
country  among  those  writings  which  may  be  read 
"for  examples  of  life." 

3.  The  Book  of  Tohit.  This  is  a  very  mteresting 
as  well  as  edifying  book.  Some  of  the  details  which 
it  contains  may,  indeed,  appear  to  our  taste  gro- 
tesque and  repulsive,  but  they  are  quite  in  keeping 
with  the  literature  of  the  East.  The  book  was 
evidently  a  very  great  favourite  in  ancient  times. 
This  is  plain  from  the  simple  fact  that  it  has  come 


APOCRYPHAL  BOOKS  OF  OLD  TESTAMENT.     121 

down  to  us  in  three  Greek  forms,  three  Latin,  two 
Hebrew,  one  Syriac,  and  one  Chaldaic.  There  is 
nothing  but  a  deep-rooted,  though  baseless,  preju- 
dice as  to  the  literary  language  of  Palestine  at  the 
time  of  its  composition,  to  give  birth  to  any  doubt 
that  it  was  originally  composed  in  the  Greek 
language.*^  Its  most  probable  date  is  towards  the 
close  of  the  period  of  the  Maccabees. 

The  story  of  the  book  is  told  in  a  very  simple  but 
graphic  fashion.  There  is  one  touch  in  it  which 
is  perhaps  unique  in  Jewish  literature.  As  every 
reader  of  Scripture  knows,  dogs  are  generally  spoken 
of  by  Hebrew  writers  with  contempt,  and  are  never 
referred  to  as  companions  of  man,  while,  metaphori- 
cally, the  name  is  often  employed  to  denote  all  that 
is  evil.  But  in  Tobit  v,  16,  we  read  respecting  Tobit 
and  the  angel,  that  "  they  w^ent  forth  both,  and  the 
young  viands  dog  with  themr  Some  have  suspected 
that  the  last  clause  is  an  interpolation,  but  on  no 
sufficient  grounds  ;  and  it  should  rather  be  welcomed 
as  one  passage  which  redeems  the  dog  from  the 
general  dislike  or  disgust  with  which  he  is  usually 
spoken  of  in  Oriental  literature. 

Till  the  Reformation,  the  Book  of  Tobit  was 
regarded  as  a  real  history,  and  is,  indeed,  frequently 
quoted   by  the    Fathers   as   one   of    the   canonical 

*  See  afterwards,  in  chaps,  viii.,  ix. 


123  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION, 

Scriptures.  But  it  is  now  regarded  by  almost  all 
scholars  as  not  being  strictly  historical :  it  is  rather 
looked  upon  as  a  didactic  and  religious  romance. 
But  this  does  not  detract  from  its  great  merits. 
Luther,  while  pronouncing  it  a  fiction,  justly  de- 
scribed it  as  "  a  book  useful  for  Christian  reading." 
Its  delineation  of  the  family  relations  is  of  the  most 
pleasing  character.  Of  course,  extravagances  appear 
in  it,  as  in  regard  to  the  exaggerated  importance 
it  attaches  to  almsgiving  and  fasting,  and  the  views 
of  the  ministry  of  angels  which  it  presents.  But 
its  moral  tone  is  uniformly  high,  and  there  is  not 
a  little  spiritual  elevation  in  the  beautiful  hymn 
contained  in  chap.  xiii.  The  book  was  included 
among  the  canonical  writings  by  the  Council  of 
Trent. 

4.  The  Book  of  Judith.  This  book,  like  that  of 
Tobit,  must  be  regarded  as  an  historical  romance. 
Some,  like  the  illustrious  scholar  Grotius,  have 
deemed  it  an  allegory,  and  found  a  significance  in 
the  names  of  all  the  characters  that  appear  in  it. 
But  this  requires  considerable  straining,  though  it  may 
be  admitted  that  several  of  the  appellations  given 
to  the  personages  which  figure  in  it  were  selected 
on  account  of  the  meaning  which  their  derivation 
suggests.  In  its  mere  literary  form,  the  book  has 
a   special  interest  as  being  one  of  the   earliest  of 


APOCRYPHAL  BOOKS  OF  OLD  TESTAMENT.     12$ 

historical  fictions.  And,  as  has  been  well  remarked, 
its  "  value  is  not  lessened  by  its  fictitious  character. 
On  the  contrary,  it  becomes  even  more  valuable 
as  exhibiting  an  ideal  type  of  heroism,  which  was 
outwardly  embodied  in  the  wars  of  independence. 
The  self-sacrificing  faith  and  unscrupulous  bravery 
of  Judith  were  the  qualities  by  which  the  champions 
of  Jewish  freedom  were  then  enabled  to  overcome 
the  power  of  Syria,  which  seemed  at  the  time  scarcely 
less  formidable  than  the  imaginary  hosts  of  Holo- 
fernes.  The  peculiar  character  of  the  book,  which 
is  exhibited  in  these  traits,  affords  the  best  indication 
of  its  date ;  for  it  cannot  be  wrong  to  refer  its 
origin  to  the  Maccabean  period,  which  it  reflects 
not  only  in  its  general  spirit,  but  -even  in  smaller 
traits."  *  Its  date  may  thus  be  fixed  about  the 
middle  of  the  second  century  before  Christ ;  and  its 
author  was  unquestionably  a  Jew  of  Palestine. 

While  there  is  much  that  is  noble  and  inspiriting 
in  the  Book  of  Judith,  the  character  of  its  heroine 
can  by  no  means  be  regarded  as  an  ideal  of  female 
excellence.  Her  conduct  was  marked  by  the  great- 
est duplicity,  and  her  religion  can  be  commended 
only  by  those  who  hold  that  *'the  end  sanctifies 
the  means."  Jael  seems  to  have  been  selected  as 
her  prototype  ;  and  if  the  treachery  of  that  Kenite 

*  Smith's  Dza.  of  Bible,  art.  Judith. 


124  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

heroine,  as  described  in  the  fourth  chapter  of  the 
Book  of  Judges,  is  to  be  reprobated,  whatever  may 
be  pleaded  in  her  behalf,  much  more  must  the 
deception  practised  by  Judith,  and  all  the  odious 
circumstances  attending  it,  be  subjected  to  the 
severest  condemnation. 

The  book  appears  to  have  been  originally  written 
in  Hebrew,  from  some  seeming  inaccuracies  of 
rendering  which  occur  in  the  Greek.  But  if  so,  the 
original  was  speedily  lost  in  the  translation  ;  and 
the  Greek  version  has  been  the  source  of  all  the 
forms  in  which  the  book  has  descended  to  our 
day. 

5.  Additions  to  the  Book  of  Esther.  These  Addi- 
tions are  found  woven  into  the  text  of  the  Septuagint 
version  with  jnuch  skill,  so  as  in  no  way  to  interfere 
with  the  natural  flow  of  the  narrative.  But  in  the 
common  English  version  they  appear  in  a  very 
confused  and  absurd  connection.  The  reason  of 
this  is,  that  the  Authorised  Version  of  161 1  slavishly 
followed  the  Latin  Bible  in  the  placing  of  these 
Additions.  Now,  when  Jerome  published  his  edition 
of  the  Vulgate,  he  first  translated  the  Book  of  Esther 
as  it  stands  in  the  Hebrew,  without  the  passages  in 
question,  and  then  added  them  from  the  Greek 
version,  indicating,  at  the  same  time,  the  particular 
parts  of  the  history  at  which  they  should  be  taken  in 


ArOCRYPHAL  BOOKS  OF  OLD  TESTAMENT.     125 

and  read.  But,  in  course  of  time,  Jerome's  explana- 
tory remarks  were  allowed  to  drop,  and  the  Additions 
then  remained  as  so  many  more  chapters  appended 
to  the  book.  Hence  the  ridiculous  order  in  which 
they  stand.  For  instance,  the  verse  which  should 
be  the  very  last  in  English  and  Latin,  as  it  is  in 
Greek,  actually  stands  as  the  first  of  the  so-called 
eleventh  chapter  ;  and  the  second  verse  of  the  same 
chapter  should  be  the  first  verse  of  Addition  I., 
which,  comprising  in  all  eighteen  verses,  is  prefixed 
to  the  canonical  book.  Altogether  there  are  seven 
Additions. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  these  Additions  were 
originally  composed  in  Greek,  but  it  is  impossible 
to  say  who  was  their  author.  They  are  used  by 
Josephus  {Antiq.  xi.  6,  i),  and  seem  to  have  been 
prized  as  highly  by  the  early  Fathers  as  the  rest  of 
the  book  (Clem.  Rom.  i.  55  ;  Clem.  Alex.  Sirom.  iv. 
19).*  The  motive  which  led  to  their  production 
appears  to  have  been  a  desire  to  supplement  sup- 
posed deficiencies  in  the  Hebrew  text.  As  is  well 
known,  the  name  of  God  does  not  occur  in  the 
whole   of  the  canonical  Book  of  Esther.     But  it  is 

*  I  desire  here  to  refer,  once  for  all,  to  the  admirable  volume 
of  Dr.  Bissell  on  the  Apocrypha,  edited  by  Dr.  Schaff,  in  con- 
nection with  the  Commentary  of  Dr.  Lange.  The  work  of  Dr. 
Bissel  on  the  Apocrypha  is  by  far  the  best  in  the  English  lan- 
guage. 


126  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION, 

copiously  made  use  of  in  the  Additions,  and  to 
introduce  it  may  have  been  one  reason  for  their 
fabrication.  There  is  nothing  objectionable  about 
them.  Luther  compared  them  to  "corn-flowers," 
which  he  was  unwilling  to  destroy.  They  were,  of 
course,  pronounced  canonical  by  the  Council  of 
Trent. 

6.  The  Book  of  Wisdom,  This  book  was  of  old 
known  by  the  title  of  "The  Wisdom  of  Solomon," 
and  was  supposed  to  have  had  the  wise  king  for  its 
author.  But,  as  it  clearly  appears  that  the  book  was 
written  in  Greek,  the  idea  of  its  Solomonic  author- 
ship must  at  once  be  set  aside.  Nor  can  any  one 
be  named  with  certainty,  or  even  probability,  as  its 
author.  It  has  been  ascribed  to  Philo  of  Alexandria ; 
but  its  contents  are,  in  several  respects,  antagonistic 
to  his  teaching.  The  date  of  its  composition  may 
be  fixed  a  little  before  the  time  of  Christ.  In  style, 
the  book  is  admirable  and  striking.  To  many  writers 
this  has  seemed  a  conclusive  proof  that  it  could  not 
have  been  written  by  a  Jew  of  Palestine.  But  those 
who  argue  thus  forget  that  they  have  to  account  for 
the  canonical  Epistle  of  St.  James.  The  two  writings 
may  be  placed  side  by  side,  so  far  as  diction  is  con- 
cerned ;  and  if  the  one  was  composed  by  a  Pales" 
tinian  Jew,  so  might  the  other. 

Many  interesting  passages  might  be  quoted  from 


APOCRYPHAL  BOOKS  OF  OLD  TESTAMENT.     127 

the  Book  of  Wisdom.    To  it  we  owe  the  beautiful 
expression,  "a  hope  full  of  immortality"  (ch.  iii.  4), 
and  that  noble  address  to  God,  "Thou  sparest  all, 
because   they   are   Thine,   O    Lord,  Thou   lover   of 
souls  "  (ch.  xi.  26).     The  following  paragr?.ph  may 
be    quoted   in    full,    on    account    of    the    splendid 
imagery,  as  well  as  just  thoughts,  which  it  contains : 
"What  hath  pride  profited  us?  or  what  good  hath 
riches   with   our  vaunting   brought   us  ?     All   these 
things  have  passed  away  like  a  shadow,  and  as  a 
message  that  hurrieth  by ;    as  a   ship  that  passeth 
through  the  billowy  water,  which,  when  it  has  gone 
through,  not  a  trace  thereof  is  to  be  found,  nor  the 
pathway  of  her  keel  amid  the  waves  ;  or,  as  when 
a  bird  hath  flown  through  the  air,  there  is  no  token 
of  her  way  discovered ;  but  the  light  air,  being  beaten 
by  the  stroke  of  her  wings,  and  parted  with  a  strong 
whirring  noise,  is  passed  through  on  moving  pinions, 
and  after  that  no  sign  is  found  of  her  way  therein ; 
or,  as  when  an  arrow  is  shot  at  a  mark,  it  parteth 
the  air,  and  that  immediately  cometh  together  again, 
so  that  a  man  cannot  know  where  it  went  through  ; 
even  so  we,  as  soon  as  we  were  born,  began  to  draw 
to  our  end,  and  had  no  sign  of  virtue  to  show,  but 
were  wasted  away  in  the  midst  of  our  wickedness. 
For  the  hope  of  the  ungodly  is  like   dust   that  is 
carried  off  by  the  wind,  and  like  thin  froth  that  is 
driven  away  by   the  storm,  and  as  a  smoke  which 


128  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

is  dispersed  by  the  wind,  and  which  passeth  away 
as  the  remembrance  of  a  guest  that  tarrieth  only  a 
day.  But  the  righteous  live  for  evermore :  their 
reward  also  is  in  the  Lord ;  and  the  care  of  them 
is  with  the  Most  High.  Therefore  shall  thpy  receive 
the  kingdom  of  glory  and  the  diadem  of  beauty  from 
the  Lord's  hand  ;  for  with  His  right  hand  shall  He 
cover  them,  and  with  His  arm  shall  He  protect 
them"  (ch.  V.  8—16).* 

7.  Ecclesiasticus.  This  is  the  Latin  name  for  the 
book  which  is  styled  in  Greek,  **  The  Wisdom  of 
Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach."  It  is  the  great  pearl  of 
the  Apocrypha.  By  far -the  longest,  it  is  also  by 
far  the  most  valuable,  of  the  books.  In  substance, 
it  consists  of  a  series  of  apothegms,  and,  according 
to  Jerome,  it  really  bore  the  name  of  "  Proverbs." 
Many  of  the  sayings  which  it  contains  are  marked 


*  So  little  is  the  Apocrypha  known  in  our  country,  at  least 
in  Scotland,  that  I  remember  hearing  a  reverend  and  learned 
professor  in  one  of  our  universities  extol  for  beauty  and  origin- 
ality the  following  metaphor  which  occurs  in  Robert  Hall's 
sermon  on  the  death  of  the  Princess  Charlotte  : — "  The  arrow 
passes  through  the  air,  which  soon  closes  upon  it,  and  all  is 
tranquil."  As  appears  from  the  passage  quoted  above,  the  image 
is  at  least  as  old  as  "  The  Book  of  Wisdom."  I  may  add  that  it 
appears  again,  before  the  time  of  Hall,  in  the  "  Night  Thoughts  '* 
of  Young,  in  which  we  find  these  lines  : — 

"  But  their  hearts  wounded,  like  the  wounded  air, 
Soon  close  :  where  passed  the  shaft,  no  trace  is  found." 


APOCRYPHAL  BOOKS  OF  OLD  TESTAMENT.     129 

by  the  greatest  shrewdness  and  knowledge  of  the 
world.      Thus,  in   chap.   xi.    7,    we   find    the   pithy 
admonition   (which    has  too   often  been  forgotten), 
*'  Blame  not  before  thou  hast  made  full  examination : 
understand  first,   and  then  rebuke."     In  chap.  xiii. 
9,  10,  we  read,  "  If  thou  be  invited  by  a  great  man, 
show  thyself  backward,  and  so  much  the  more  will 
he  invite  thee.     Press  thou  not  upon  him,  lest  thou 
be  put  back ;  stand    not  far  off,   lest  thou  be  for- 
gotten."    In  ver.  25   of  the  same  chapter  we  find 
the  following  too  true   declaration:  "When  a  rich 
man  speaketh,  every  one  is   silent,   and  they  extol 
his  speech  unto  the  clouds ;  but  when  a  poor  man 
speaketh,  they  say,  Who  is  this  }  and  if  he  stumble 
they  will  help  utterly  to  overthrow  him."     The  fol- 
lowing  original   and    suggestive   comparison  occurs 
in  chap.  xxv.  20: — "As  the  climbing  up  by  a  sandy 
way  is  to  the  feet  of  an  old  man,  so  is  a  woman  full 
of  words  to  a  quiet  man."     The  last  clause  of  chap, 
xxxviii.  25  will  be  recognised  as  very  familiar,  and 
is  quoted  by  many  who  have  no  idea  whence  it  is 
derived :  "  How  can  he  get  wisdom  that  holdeth  the 
plough,  and  that  glorieth  in  the  goad,  that  driveth 
oxen,   and  is  occupied   in  their  labours,   and  whose 
talk  is  of  bullocks  ?  "     The  following  is  the  eloquent 
tribute  which  the  writer  pays  to  Simon  the  Just,  in 
chap.  1.  5 — 10  : — "  How  glorious  was  he  in  the  midst 
of  the  people,  as  he  came  out  from  the  inner  sanc- 

9 


I30  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

tuary!     He  was  as  the  morning  star  in  the  midst 
of  a  cloud,  and  as  the  moon  when  she  is  at  the  full, 
as   the  sun  shining  upon  the  temple  of  the  Most 
High,  and  as  the  rainbow  giving  light  in  the  bright 
clouds,  as  the  flower  of  roses  in  the  spring  of  the 
year,   as   lilies  by  the  fountains  of  waters,   and    as 
branches  of  the   frankincense  tree   in   the  time  of 
summer,  as  fire  and  incense  in  the  censer,  and  as  a 
vessel  of  beaten  gold  adorned  with  all   manner  of 
precious  stones,  as  an  olive  tree  putting  forth  fruit, 
and  as  a  cypress  tree  which  lifteth  itself  up  unto  the 
clouds."     I   only   add   one    remarkable    passage   in 
which   the   writer    represents   God's    mercy   as   ex- 
tending to  all  the  members  of  our  race.     He  says 
(chap,  xviii.   8 — 13),    ''What  is  man,  and  whereto 
serveth  he  }  what  is  his  good,  and  what  is  his  evil } 
The  number  of  a  man's  days  are  many,  if  they  reach 
a  hundred  years.     As  a  drop  of  water  unto  the  sea, 
and  as  a  grain  in  comparison  with  the  sand,  so  are 
a  few  years  to  the  days  of  eternity.     Therefore  is 
the  Lord  patient  with  them,  and  poureth  forth  His 
mercy  upon  them.     He  saw  and  perceived  their  end 
to  be  evil :  therefore  He  multiplied  His  compassion. 
The  mercy  of  man  is  toward  his  neighbour,  but  the 
mercy  of  the  Lord  is  toward  all  flesh  :  He  reproveth, 
and  educateth,  and   teacheth,   and   bringeth  again, 
as  a  shepherd  does  his  flock." 

As  we  learn  from  the  prologue  of  this  book,  it 


APOCRYPHAL  BOOKS  OF  OLD  TESTAMENT.     131 


was  at  first  written  in  Hebrew,  that  is,  probably  in 
Aramaic,  the  popular  dialect  of  the  Jews  after  the 
captivity.  But  no  relic  of  the  original  remains.  As 
a  necessary  consequence  of  the  Hellenizing  ten- 
dencies of  the  Jews,  the  book  was  speedily  translated 
into  Greek  by  the  grandson  of  the  author,  and  the 
version  henceforth  supplanted  the  original.  The 
date  of  the  book,  as  at  first  issued,  was  probably 
about  B.C.  200,  and  the  Greek  translation  of  it  was 
produced  some  half-century  afterwards.  As  all 
agree,  both  author  and  translator  were  Jews  of 
Palestine. 

8.  The  Book  of  Baruch,  This  book,  though  pro- 
nounced canonical  by  the  Council  of  Trent,  has  little 
that  can  be  pleaded  in  its  behalf,  either  on  the 
ground  of  intrinsic  merit  or  external  authority.  It 
was  but  lightly  esteemed  by  the  Jews  of  old,  and  is 
not  recognized  by  the  earliest  Christian  writers. 
The  Church  of  Rome,  however,  has  assigned  it  a 
place  in  the  canon,  along  with  most  of  the  other 
Apocryphal  books. 

The  author  assumes  to  have  been  the  well-known 
associate  of  Jeremiah  (Jer.  xxxii.  12,  etc.).  But 
this  is  easily  disproved  by  the  historical  inaccuracies 
which  the  book  contains.  It  was  probably  com- 
posed by  one  or  more  authors  in  the  second  or  third 
century  before  Christ.     The  first  part  is  thought  to 


132  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

have  been  originally  written  in  Hebrew ;  the  second 
was  unquestionably  composed  in  Greek.  The  whole 
book  is  destitute  of  independent  thought,  and  is 
simply  a  feeble  echo  of  the  earlier  canonical  Hebrew 
Scriptures. 

In  imitation  of  the  Vulgate,  our  common  English 
version  has  inserted  the  so-called  "Epistle  of 
Jeremy"  as  the  sixth  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Baruch. 
The  prophet  Jeremiah  had  certainly  nothing  to  do 
with  this  production.  It  was  clearly  written  in 
Greek,  and  probably  about  the  period  of  the 
Maccabees. 

9.  Additions  to  the  Book  of  Daniel.  These  Additions 
consist  of  (i)  The  Song  of  the  Three  Children, 
(2)  The  Story  of  Susanna,  and  (3)  Of  Bel  and  the 
Dragon.  All  the  three  pieces  may  be  described  as 
worse  than  worthless,  and  have  certainly  no  claim 
to  a  place  in  the  canon,  although  that  rank  has  been 
given  them  by  the  Church  of  Rome.  They  seem  to 
have  been  composed  in  Greek,  in  the  first  or  second 
century  before  Christ. 

10.  The  Prayer  of  Manasseh.  This  short  compo- 
sition is  far  superior  to  the  legends  just  noticed, 
although,  curiously  enough,  along  with  i  and  2 
Esdras  (alone  of  the  Apocryphal  books)  it  was  re- 
fused admission  into  the  canon   by  the  Council  of 


APOCRYPHAL  BOOKS  OF  OLD  TESTAMENT.     133 

Trent.  It  expresses,  with  not  a  little  force  and 
feeling,  the  penitential  emotions  which  are  supposed 
to  have  sprung  up  in  the  bosom  of  Manasseh,  while 
lying  in  captivity  at  Babylon.  Many  legends,  doubt- 
less, arose  in  connection  with  the  striking  history 
of  ]\Ianasseh,  as  recorded  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  ; 
and  this  prayer,  written  in  Greek,  seems  to  have 
found  its  way  into  the  Septuagint  about  the  same 
time  as  the  Additions  to  Daniel  just  noticed. 

1 1 .  The  First  Book  of  Maccabees.  There  is  reason 
for  gratitude  that  this  book  has  descended  to  our 
day.  It  contains  a  very  simple,  interesting,  and 
substantially  accurate  narrative  of  the  mad  attempts 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  in  particular,  against  the 
religion  and  liberties  of  the  Jews,  and  of  the  heroic 
struggle  by  which,  under  the  Maccabean  princes, 
they  secured  their  independence.  The  history  com- 
prised in  the  book  extends  from  about  B.C.  175  to 
B.C.  135;  and  for  some  part  of  that  period  we  are 
dependent  for  information  on  it  alone.  It  is  thus 
an  exceedingly  valuable  historical  relic,  and  although 
exaggerations  occur  in  it  (as  in  iv.  14 — 24,  etc.), 
and  a  poetical  colouring  is  often  given  to  the 
language  (see  ii,  5 — 13,  etc.),  yet  the  general  credi- 
bility of  the  book  is  universally  acknowledged.  It 
is  believed  to  have  been  originally  written  in  Hebrew, 
but  the  original  was  speedily  superseded  by  a  Greek 


134  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

translation,  and  in   that   form  the  book  was   made 
use  of  by  the  Jewish  historian,  Josephus. 

12.  The  Second  Book  of  Maccabees.  History  is  also 
to  be  found  in  this  book,  but  not  in  such  a  pure 
and  uncorrupted  state  as  in  the  former.  To  some 
extent,  both  books  travel  over  the  same  ground, 
and  where  discrepancies  exist  between  them,  as  is 
not  unfrequently  the  case,  there  need  be  no  question 
that  the  first  is  to  be  preferred.  This  second  book, 
however,  is,  in  splendour  of  diction  and  power  of 
rhetoric,  superior  to  the  former.  Passages  of  rich 
expressiveness  occur  (as  in  v.  20,  viii.  18,  etc.); 
and  sometimes  the  narrative  is  very  lively  and  rapid 
(as  in  xiii.  22 — 26),  As  almost  all  now  admit,  the 
book  was  originally  written  in  Greek,  and  its  date 
may  be  fixed  about  the  middle  of  the  first  century 
before  Christ. 

Such,  then,  is  a  brief  account  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment Apocrypha ;  and  from  what  has  been  said, 
the  reader  will  see  that  some  of  the  books  which 
it  contains  are  extremely  valuable.  They  link  ©n, 
as  nothing  else  can  do,  the  Old  Testament  to  the 
New,  and  fill  up,  to  some  extent,  that  deplorable 
hiatus  which,  but  for  them,  exists  between  the 
period  of  the  Return  and  the  opening  of  the  Gospel 
history.     It   is  therefore  much  to  be  regretted  that 


APOCRYPHAL  BOOKS  OF  OLD  TESTAMENT.     135 


an  extreme  and  fanatical  Protestantism  has  led,  in 
many  quarters,  to  an  almost  entire  neglect  of  these 
books.  They  are  certainly  not  worthy  of  being 
placed,  as  the  Church  of  Rome  has  placed  most  of 
them,  on  a  level  with  the  books  comprised  in  the 
Hebrew  canon  of  Scripture ;  but  that  is  no  reason 
why  they  should,  as  a  whole,  be  spoken  of  with 
scorn,  or  treated  with  neglect.  Many  of  the 
Fathers  refer  to  them  with  the  greatest  respect. 
Luther,  as  we  have  seen,  often  drops  a  kindly  word 
in  their  favour.  He  even  goes  so  far  as  to  declare 
respecting  the  First  Book  of  Maccabees,  that  *'  it 
is  not  unworthy  to  be  reckoned  among  the  other 
sacred  books,"  and  Grimm,  one  of  our  greatest 
modern  authorities  on  the  subject  of  the  Apocrypha, 
emphasises  this  opinion  of  the  Reformer,  by  saying 
that  '*  it  deserves  a  place  among  the  Hagiographa  of 
the  canon,  not  entirely  perhaps  with  the  same  right 
as  the  books  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  but  decidedly 
with  a  better  claim  than  the  Book  of  Esther."* 

The  question  whether  the  Apocryphal  books  are 
quoted  or  referred  to  in  the  New  Testament  has 
been  much  discussed,  and  with  varying  results. 
As  to  express  quotations,  there  seem  to  be  none, 
though  many  striking  parallels  can  be  produced. 
But  as  to  references,   these   are  clear  and   certain. 

*  Quoted  by  Dr.  Davidson,  Introd.  to  Old  Test.,  iii.  443. 


136  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

No  one  can  consider  with  a  fair  mind  such  a  passage 
as  Heb.  xi.  35 — 38,  without  perceiving  that  it  con- 
tains several  obvious  allusions  to  the  narratives  com- 
prised in  the  first  and  second  books  of  Maccabees. 
In  fine,  a  great  boon  would  be  conferred  on 
ordinary  English  readers,  if  at  least  the  Book  of 
Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  and  the  Books  of  Maccabees 
were  printed  in  our  common  editions  of  the  Bible. 
They  might  either  be  inserted  in  smaller  type  than 
the  rest  of  the  volume,  between  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments,  or  given  in  like  type,  as  an  appendix  at 
the  end  of  the  New  Testament. 


CHAPTER   VII. 

THE    TEXT  OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT 

IN  dealing  with  the  text  of  the  Old  Testament, 
scholars  find  themselves  in  a  very  different  posi- 
tion from  that  which  they  occupy  in  seeking  to  settle 
the  true  text  of  the  New  Testament.  They  have  less 
trouble  with  the  Old  Testament  text,  simply  because 
they  possess  fewer  materials  for  criticism.  The 
number  of  manuscripts  containing  the  whole  or 
part  of  the  Greek  New  Testament  is  enormous ; 
and  many  of  these  can  be  proved  to  be  quite  inde- 
pendent of  each  other.  Moreover,  several  of  the 
manuscripts  of  the  New  Testament  are  of  great 
antiquity  ;  some,  as  the  Vatican,  the  Sinaitic,  and  the 
Alexandrian,  dating  as  far  back  as  the  fourth  or 
fifth  century  of  our  era.  But  it  is  wholly  different 
with  the  manuscripts  of  the  Old  Testament.  Very 
few  of  these  can  be  deemed  older  than  the  twelfth 
century,  and,  when  carefully  examined,  they  are 
all  found  to  have  sprung  from  the  same  source, 
being  only  somewhat  varying  forms  of  one  original 
copy. 


138  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

The  Old  Testament  text,  then,  so  far  as  we  have 
any  means  at  our  command  for  establishing  its 
correctness  by  means  of  manuscripts,  is  rather  to  be 
compared  with  some  of  the  classical  writers,  than 
with  the  New  Testament.  For  example,  it  is  gene- 
rally held  that  all  existing  copies  of  the  Greek 
tragedian,  -^schylus,  are  to  be  traced  to  a  single 
original  manuscript,  the  date  of  which  cannot  be 
carried  higher  than  the  tenth  century.  In  that  case, 
the  variations  which  appear  in  other  manuscripts  of 
^schylus  can  simply  be  regarded  as  inaccuracies 
which  have  been  committed,  or  conjectural  emenda- 
tions which  have  been  introduced,  by  transcribers. 
So  with  respect  to  the  text  of  the  Old  Testament. 
All  manuscripts,  even  the  most  ancient,  so  far  as  yet 
known,  are  to  be  traced  to  one  archetypal  text, 
which  had  become  fixed  among  the  Jews  some  time 
after  the  birth  of  Christ. 

This  seems  a  settled  point  in  the  judgment  of 
modern  Hebrew  scholars.  They  are,  in  general, 
agreed  *'  that  all  copies  of  the  Hebrew  text  go  back 
to  one  archetype  ;  "  *  and,  referring  to  this  conclu- 
sion, as  held  by  such  men  as  Olshausen,  Lagarde,  and 
others,  Dr.  R.  Smith,  who  is  so  familiar  with  the 
whole  subject,  after  expressing  himself  to  the  above 
eifect,  does   not   hesitate  to   add,    **  I  know  of  no 

*  The  Old  Test,  in  Jew.  Ch.,  p.  397. 


THE    TEXT  OF  THE   OLD    TESTAMENT.     139 

attempt  to  refute  the  argument."  We  may  thus  say, 
respecting  the  present  text  of  the  Old  Testament, 
what  has  been  said  in  regard  to  the  poem  of 
Lucretius, — '*  It  is  now  universally  admitted  that 
every  existing  copy  has  come  from  one  original, 
which  has  itself  long  disappeared."  * 

The  important  inquiry,  therefore,  at  once  presents 
itself, — "■  Whence  was  that  fontal  text  derived  }  " 
The  following  answer  has  been  recently  given  to 
this  question.  Referring  to  the  ancient  scribes, 
Dr.  R.  Smith  remarks,  "We  have  the  text  of  the 
Hebrew  Old  Testament  as  they  gave  it  to  us."  And 
he  goes  on  to  say,  "  After  the  fall  of  the  Jewish 
state,  when  the  scribes  ceased  to  be  an  active  party 
in  a  living  commonwealth,  and  became  more  and 
more  pure  scholars,  gathering  up  and  codifying  all 
the  fragments  of  national  literature  and  national  life 
that  remained  to  them,  we  find  the  text  of  the  Old 
Testament  carefully  conformed  to  a  single  archetype. 
But  we  cannot  trace  this  text  back  through  the 
centuries  when  the  nation  had  still  a  life  of  its  own. 
Nay,  we  can  be  sure  that  in  these  earlier  centuries 
copies  of  the  Bible  circulated,  and  were  freely  read 
even  by  learned  men  like  the  author  of  the  Book  of 
Jubilees,  which  had  great  and  notable  variations  of 
text,  not  inferior  in  extent  to  those  still  existing  in 

*  Munro's  Lucreiius,  ii  i. 


140  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

the  New  Testament  MSS.  In  later  times  every  trace 
of  these  varying  copies  disappears.  They  must  have 
been  suppressed  or  gradually  superseded  by  a  deli- 
berate effort,  which  has  been  happily  compared  by 
the  German  scholar,  Noldeke,  to  the  action  of  the 
Caliph  Othman  in  destroying  all  copies  of  the 
.Koran  which  diverged  from  the  standard  text  that 
he  had  adopted.  There  can  be  no  question  who 
were  the  instruments  in  this  work.  The  scribes 
alone  possessed  the  necessary  influence  to  give  one 
text  or  one  standard  MS.  a  position  of  such  supreme 
authority.  .  .  .  This,  then,  was  what  the  scribes  did. 
They  chose  for  us  the  Hebrew  text  which  we  have 
now  got.  Were  they  in  a  position  to  choose  the 
very  best  text,  to  produce  a  critical  edition  which 
could  justly  be  accepted  as  the  standard,  so  that  we 
lose  nothing  by  the  suppression  of  all  divergent 
copies  ?  Now,  this  at  least  we  can  say,  that  if  they 
fixed  for  us  a  satisfactory  text,  the  scribes  did  not 
do  so  in  virtue  of  any  great  critical  skill  which  they 
possessed  in  comparing  MSS.  and  selecting  the  best 
readings."  And,  *'  if  the  scribes  were  not  the  men 
to  make  a  critical  text,  it  is  plain  that  they  were  also 
not  in  a  position  to  choose,  upon  scientific  principles, 
the  very  best  extant  MS.  ;  but  it  is  very  probable 
that  they  selected  an  old  and  well-written  copy, 
possibly  one  of  those  MSS.  which  were  preserved  in 
the  court  of  the  Temple.     Between  this  copy  and 


THE   TEXT  OF   THE   OLD    7ESTAMENT.      141 


the  original  autographs  of  the  sacred  writers  there 
must  have  been  many  a  link.''  * 

It  must  be  confessed  that  this  is  a  very  plausible 
theory,  but  it  is  set  forth  with  by  far  too  much  con- 
fidence. The  truth  is,  that  the  real  character  of  the 
existing  Hebrew f  text,  as  respects  absolute  trust- 
worthiness, is  as  yet  undecided,  and  must  remain  so, 
until  certain  great  objects  are  accomplished.  There 
must  be  a  more  scientific  handling  of  all  the  mate- 
rials of  criticism.  Manuscripts  and  versions  of  the 
Hebrew  text  must  be  more  thoroughly  investigated, 
while  a  far  more  exhaustive  collection  must  be  made 
of  those  quotations  from  the  Old  Testament,  which 
are  so  profusely  scattered  through  the  lat'=^r  Jewish 
literature.  Meanwhile,  the  following  brief  account 
may  be  given  of  the  manner  in  which  the  Hebrew 
text,  as  it  stands,  has  descended  to  our  day. 

We  owe  it  to  the  labours  oi  a  company  of  Jewish 

*   The  Old  Test.,  etc.,  p.  67  ff. 

f  The  Hebrew  text  generally  current  at  the  present  day  is 
substantially  that  of  Van  der  Hooght,  published  at  Amsterdam 
and  Utrecht  in  1705.  This  text  was  based  on  that  of  Athias, 
a  learned  rabbi  of  Amsterdam,  whose  first  edition  came  out  in 
1 66 1,  and  was  revised  in  1667.  But  the  original  text,  on  which 
all  subsequent  issues  have  chiefly  rested,  was  that  of  Bomberg, 
printed  at  Venice,  1525-26.  The  editor  was  a  learned  Tunisian 
Jew,  named  Jacob  ben  Chasin,  and  he  happily  adopted  the  Mas- 
soretic  text,  which,  as  we  shall  see,  there  is  reason  to  believe,  on 
the  whole,  very  correct,  though  undoubtedly  admitting  of  many 
emendations. 


142  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

scholars,  called  *'the  Massorets,"  whose  work, 
beginning  about  a.d.  600,  extended  over  centuries, 
and  was  not  concluded  until  about  a  thousand  years 
after  Christ.  The  term  '*  Massorets  "  means  *'pos-. 
sessors  of  tradition,"  and  the  result  of  the  long- 
continued  efforts  of  those  included  under  this 
appellation  is  known  as  *'  the  Massora,"  a  kindred 
term,  denoting  what  has  been  handed  down  from 
former  generations. 

The  work  proposed  to  themselves  by  the  Massorets 
was  of  a  very  varied  and  comprehensive  character- 
It  embraced  such  points  as  the  settlement  of  the 
true  text ;  the  proper  vocalization  and  accentuation 
of  the  words  ;  the  numbering  of  the  verses  of  each 
of  the  books  of  Scripture  ;  and,  to  a  certain  extent, 
the  discussion  of  that  interpretation  of  the  sacred 
writings  which  should  be  accepted.  The  contents 
of  the  Massora  have  usually  been  described  as 
dealing  with  the  letters,  words,  and  verses  of  the 
books  of  Scripture.  And,  with  regard  to  each  of 
these,  the  most  minute  observations  are  made.  As 
respects  the  letters,  the  Massorets  counted  how  often 
each  letter  of  the  Hebrew  alphabet  occurred  in  the 
Old  Testament — noticed  irregularities  in  the  pointing 
which  a  few  letters  presented — and  commented  on 
anvthino:  unusual  which  was  to  be  noted  in  the  form 
or  size  of  some  of  them.     As  regards  the  words,  they 


THE  TEXT  OF  THE   OLD    TESTAMENT.    143 

recorded  on  the  margin  readings  which  were  to  be 
preferred  to  those  in  the  text — noticed  any  peculi- 
arities of  meaning  or  syntax — and  stated  how  often 
particular  words  were  to  be  found  at  the  beginning, 
middle,  or  end  of  verses.  And  again,  in  regard  to 
the  verses,  they  pointed  out  the  middle  one  in  each 
of  the  books,  named  the  letters  with  which  verses 
began,  and  took  notice  of  various  other  circum- 
stances, often  of  a  trivial  or  childish  character,  but 
all  showing  the  microscopic  attention  which  had 
been  devoted  to  the  sacred  text.* 

One  of  the  most  valuable  services  rendered  by  the 
Massorets  was  their  collection  of  various  readings. 
The  number  of  these  has  been  differently  estimated 
at  from  about  800  to  1170.  They  were  in  no  case 
admitted  into  the  text  by  the  Massorets  themselves, 
but  were  either  written  on  the  margin,  or  preserved 
in  separate  documents.  In  existing  manuscripts, 
however,  these  marginal  notes  are  often  found 
incorporated  in  the  text.  They,  no  doubt,  arose 
partly  from  the  various  readings  met  with  in  the 
different  manuscripts  used  by  the  Massorets,  and 
partly  from  critical  conjecture  on  the  part  of  the 
compilers  of  the  Massora.     These  marginal  varia- 


*  So  minute  were  their  observations,  that  they  noted  the  verses, 
such  as  Zech.  vi.  1 1 — amounting  to  twenty-six  in  the  whole 
Bible — which  contain  in  themselves  all  the  letters  of  the  Hebrew 
alphabet. 


144  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

tions  seem  always  to  have  represented  the  readings 
which    the    Massorets   preferred,    and   are,    in   fact, 
generally  superior   to   the  traditional   text.     In  our 
English  version  of  the  Old  Testament,   sometimes 
the  **  written"  or  received  text  is  followed,  while  at 
other  times  the  "  reading  "  on  the  margin  is  adopted. 
A  curious   phenomenon   will    be   found  here  and 
there  presenting  itself  to  the  eyes  of  one  who  looks 
carefully  through  a  copy  of  the    Hebrew  Bible    as 
printed  at  the  present  day.     He  will  observe  certain 
letters  with  marks    over   them,   others  printed    in  a 
larger  size  than  common,  and  still  others  printed  in  a 
smaller  form  than  the  rest,  with  a  few  less  frequent 
peculiarities.     Thus  in  Gen.  xvi.  5,  xviii.   19,  xxxvii. 
12,  etc.,   a  circular  mark  appears  over  some  of  the 
words,  which  may  be  thus  represented  in  English, 
"where;"  and  the  Rabbinical  writers  explain  these 
marks  as  indicating  that  a  mystical  sense  is  to  be 
found   in   the   passages ;  but   what   the    signs    were 
meant  at  first  to  indicate  cannot  now  be  determined. 
In  other  places,  letters  are   either  increased  or  di- 
minished in  size,  so  as  to  attract  special  attention  ; 
and  this  practice,  too,  is  thought  to  point  out  hidden 
meanings   which    would    not    otherwise    have    been 
suspected.     Thus,  in  Deut.  vi.  4,  the  final  letter  of 
the  Hebrew  word  for  **  hear,"  is  enlarged,  as  if  it 
were  written  in  English  ''  hear,"  and  this  is  regarded 
as  calling  particular  attention  to  the  importance  of 


THE    TEXT  OF  THE   OLD    TESTAMENT     145 

the  statement  about  to  be  made.  On  the  other 
hand,  letters  are  sometimes  found  written  in  a  smaller 
form  than  those  around  them,  as  in  Esther  ix.  7, 
where  the  name  of  one  of  Haman's  sons  is  written 
as  if  thus  in  English,  "  Parshandatha,"  and  this  dimi- 
nution of  the  Hebrew  letter  standing  for  th  is 
thought  to  suggest  the  disdain  of  the  Jews  for 
Haman  and  his  children.  The  peculiarities  of  writing 
referred  to  probably  had  their  origin  in  mere  acci- 
dent ;  but  their  careful  preservation  by  one  copyist 
after  another  shows  the  extreme  watchfulness  which 
was  brought  to  bear  on  the  work  of  transcription ; 
and  it  is  a  curious  fact  that  such  variations  in  the 
size  of  letters,  due  at  first  to  merely  accidental 
causes,  should  have  a  place  in  our  printed  copies  of 
the  Hebrew  Bible  even  at  the  present  day. 

The  important  subject  of  vocalization  was  formerly 
glanced  at,  but  here  falls  to  be  more  particularly 
considered.  It  was  shown  that  only  the  consonants 
were,  for  a  very  long  period,  written  in  Hebrew 
documents,  and  that  most  diverse  meanings  might 
be  attached  to  these,  according  as  one  set  of  vowels 
or  another  accompanied  them.  Strange  to  say,  some 
recent  writers  have  pleaded  that  the  vagueness  of 
meaning  thus  imparted  to  the  text  was  an  advantage, 
and  that  therefore  the  Hebrew  text  should  be  inter- 
preted  in   any   way  the   consonants    by  themselves 

10 


146  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

would  permit !  But  this  is  obviously  absurd.  The 
sacred  text  could  have  had  at  first  but  one  definite 
meaning,  and  this  must  have  been  fixed  by  the 
particular  vowels  which  in  every  case  waited  upon 
the  consonants.  To  give  another  illustration :  as 
in  English,  the  three  consonants,  W  R  D,  may  mean 
either  "ward"  or  "word,"  according  to  the  vowel 
which  is  placed  between  the  first  and  second  letters, 
while,  if  vowels  are  inserted  also  between  the  second 
and  third  letters,  we  may  have  such  diff"erent  senses 
suggested  as  "warred"  "wearied"  "worried;"  so  is 
it  very  frequently  in  Hebrew.  In  fact,  there  are 
some  cases  in  which  we  know  that  the  Jewish 
authorities  differed  as  to  the  proper  vowels,  and 
therefore  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  words.  Thus, 
the  word  rendered  "bells"  in  Zech.  xiv.  20,  may 
with  a  different  pointing  be  translated  "  shadows," 
and  it  is  actually  so  taken  by  some  of  the  Rabbinical 
writers.  Again,  the  word  rendered  "  bed "  in  Gen. 
xlvii.  31,  may,  with  different  vowels,  be  translated 
"  staff,"  and  is  so  taken  by  the  Septuagint.  This 
accounts  for  the  difference  between  Gen.  xlvii,  31,  as 
given  in  our  Authorised  Version,  and  Heb.  xi.  21, 
which  refers  to  the  passage.  In  the  latter  the 
Septuagint  is  followed.  From  such  illustrations  it 
becomes  plain  how  important  the  question  is  as  to 
the  degree  of  authority  which  is  to  be  attached  to 
the  traditional  svstem  of  vocalization. 


THE   TEXT  OF  THE   OLD    TESTAMENT.      147 

Very  various  opinions  have  been  expressed  as  to 
the  origin  and  authorship  of  the  Hebrew  vowel 
points.  Some  have  maintained  that  they  were 
invented  or  restored  by  Ezra,  and  then  handed 
down  by  tradition,  until  at  last  they  were  perfected 
and  written  down  by  the  Massorets.  Others  have 
held  that  the  Massorets  themselves  invented  them  ; 
while  such  an  eminent  Hebrew  and  Rabbinical 
scholar  as  Dr.  Lightfoot  goes  so  far  as  to  claim  for 
them  divine  inspiration.  These  and  other  discrepant 
theories  sufficiently  prove  that  no  certain  conclusion 
can-  be  reached  on  the  point  in  question.  We  can 
only  be  guided  by  probability  in  deciding  it.  If  I 
may  venture  to  express  an  opinion  regarding  it,  I 
should  be  i-nclined  to  hold  that  provision  had  been 
made  from  the  time  when  the  Hebrew  began  to  fade 
out  of  use  as  a  living  tongue,  for  the  accurate  trans- 
mission of  its  vowel  points.  We  have  seen  what  a 
vital  matter  this  is  in  the  interpretation  of  the 
language.  The  most  diverse  significations  attach 
themselves  to  words,  according  to  the  vowels  by 
which  their  consonants  are  attended.  And  we  can- 
not conceive  that  such  a  momentous  matter  as  the 
correct  exegesis  of  Scripture  would  be  left  to  hap- 
hazard, or  would  not,  in  fact,  be  cared  for  in  the 
most  scrupulous  and  effective  manner.  Probably, 
therefore,  about  the  date  of  the  return  from  the 
captivity,  means  were  devised  for  fixing  and  trans- 


148  OLD   TESTAMEMT  REVISION, 

miting  the  proper  Hebrew  vocalization.  There  is, 
however,  no  proof  that  the  vowels  were  written  in 
the  text,  along  with  the  consonants,  for  many 
centuries  afterwards.  It  is  doubtful  whether  they 
are  referred  to  in  the  Talmud  or  not,  some  scholars 
taking  an  affirmative,  and  others  a  negative,  view  of 
this  question.  What  alone  seems  certain  is,  that  they 
were  no  invention  of  the  Massorets,  but  had  existed 
long  before  .their  day,  and  that  the  system  was  simply 
elaborated  and  written  down  by  them  in  the  course 
of  the  many  centuries  embraced  by  their  labours. 

Something  must  now  be  said  with  respect  to  the 
Hebrew  accents.  These  fulfil  far  more  important  and 
manifold  purposes  than  is  the  case  in  most  other 
languages.  First,  and  as  in  other  tongues,  they 
indicate  the  tone-syllable.  This  is  a  far  more  weighty 
matter  than  we  sometimes  clearly  apprehend.  From 
being  accustomed  to  read  Greek  and  Latin  accord- 
ing to  quantity,  and  not  accent,  we  are  apt  to  forget 
how  important  the  latter  is,  in  order  to  the  bring- 
ing out  of  the  true  meaning  of  a  word.  F'very  one, 
however,  who  has  been  in  Greece,  where  the  ancient 
language  is  so  wonderfully  preserved  in  substance, 
soon  discovers  how  necessary  attention  to  the  correct 
accentuation  is,  in  order  that  he  may  either  under- 
stand, or  be  understood.  And  we  have  only  to  think 
what  different  ideas  are  suggested  in  our  own  Ian- 


THE   TEXT  OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.     149 

guage  by  the  words  present  and  present^  desert  and 
desert,  that  we  may  feel  how  much  frequently  depends 
on  attending  to  the  proper  accentuation  of  a  word.* 
Again,  the  Hebrew  accents  are  also  used  as  a 
means  of  punctuation.  This,  too,  is  a  most  impor- 
tant object.  As  every  one  who  reflects  for  a  moment 
will  perceive,  the  place  and  manner  in  which  stops 
are  employed  often  amount  to  interpretation.  A 
striking  illustration  of  this  is  found  in  the  New 
Testament  in  Rom.  ix.  5.  As  that  verse  stands  in 
the  Authorised  Version,  it  runs  thus  :  "  Whose  are 
the  fathers,  and  of  whom  as  concerning  the  flesh 
■  Christ  came,  who  is  over  all,  God  blessed  for  ever. 
Amen."  But  readers  of  the  Revised  Version  find 
the  following  note  upon  the  margin:  **  Some  modern 
interpreters  place  a  full  stop  dSXer  Jiesh,  and  translate. 
He  who  is  God  over  all  be  {is)  blessed  for  ever;  or.  He 

*  Every  Scotchman  has  smiled  at  times  to  hear  from  the  lips 
of  Englishmen  such  an  accentuation  as  Balmoral  for  Balmoral, 
MSntrose  for  Montrose,  Oban  for  Oban;  and  the  following 
amusing  illustration  may  be  added  of  the  strange  way  in  which 
a  misplaced  accent  disguises  a  word.  The  story  goes  that  an 
accomplished  Frenchman,  who  had  acquired  his  knowledge  of 
English  only  from  books,  cherished  a  great  admiration  for  the 
pastoral  poet  Shenstone,  and  that,  on  the  death  of  his  favourite, 
he  wrote  the  following  epitaph  in  his  honour  : — 

"  Beneath  this  plain  stone 
Lies  WilHam  Shenstone, 
Who  wrote  on  things  rural. 
In  language  natural !  " 


150  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

who  is  over  all  is  God,  blessed  for  ever.  Others  punc- 
tuate, flesh,  who  is  over  all.  God  he  {is)  blessed  for 
everP  *  There  is  nothing  corresponding  to  stops  in 
the  ancient  Greek  manuscripts,  so  that  the  true 
rendering  of  such  a  passage  as  the  above  must  be 
reached  on  other  grounds.  But  the  Hebrew  text 
has,  in  this  respect,  the  advantage.  It  is  furnished 
with  a  rich  system  of  accents,  which  serve,  among 
other  purposes,  to  show  the  relation  in  which  each 
word  stands  to  the  whole  sentence.  By  attending 
to  the  interpunction  thus  secured,  various  errors  of 
translation  may  be  avoided.  Thus,  some  Jewish 
expositors  have  striven  hard  to  get  rid  of  the  Mes- 
sianic reference  in  Isaiah  ix.  5,  which  is  rendered  as 
follows  in  our  Authorised  Version :  "  For  unto  us  a 
child    is    born,  unto    us  a  son  is  given :    and    the 


*  Many  illustrations  of  the  importance  of  a  proper  punctua- 
tion in  order  to  bring  out  the  real  meaning  or  force  of  a  passage 
might  be  adduced.  The  following  additional  one  may  be  given 
from  the  Samson  of  Milton.  Near  the  beginning  of  the  poem 
we  find  these  lines  generally  pointed  as  follows: — 

"  Ask  for  this  great  deliverer  now,  and  find  him 
Eyeless  in  Gaza  at  the  mill  wiih  slaves, 
Himself  in  bonds  under  Phiiistian  yoke." 

But  how  much  more  strikingly  is  the  climax  of  Samson's 
miseries  brought  out  when  the  second  line  is  differently  punc- 
tuated, and  the  passage  read  thus  : — 

"  Ask  for  this  great  deliverer  now,  and  find  him 
Eyeless,  in  Gaza,  at  the  mill,  with  slaves, 
Himself  in  bonds  under  Phiiistian  yoke." 


THE   TEXT  OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.     151 

government  shall  be  upon  his  shoulder;  and  his 
name  shall  be  called  Wonderful,  Counsellor,  the 
mighty  God,  the  everlasting  Father,  the  Prince  of 
peace."  They  have  tried  to  substitute  some  such 
rendering  as  the  following:  '*The  God  who  is  called 
Wonderful,  Counsellor,  the  mighty  God,  the  ever- 
lasting Father,  calls  his  name  the  Prince  of  peace;" 
but  the  accentuation  is  against  this,  and  in  favour  of 
the  common  English  version  ;  *  while  Aben  Ezra, 
a  celebrated  Jewish  Rabbi,  himself  declares,  "Any 
interpretation  which  is  not  in  accordance  with  the 
arrangement  of  the  accents  thou  shalt  not  consent 
to,  nor  shalt  thou  listen  to  it." 

Yet  again,  the  Hebrew  accents  were  intended  to 
serve  a  musical  purpose.  They  regulate  that  pecu- 
liar cantillation  made  use  of  by  the  Jews  in  the  reci- 
tation of  the  Scriptures  in  the  synagogues.  Some 
have  maintained  that  their  import  from  the  first  was 
essentially  rhythmical.  As  to  their  antiquity,  the 
same  remarks  will  apply  that  have  been  made  above 
with  respect  to  the  Hebrew  vowel  points.  It  is 
certain,  from  the  way  in  which  the  accents  are  re- 
ferred to  in  the  Massora,  that  they  were  of  earlier 
date  than  that  compilation.  Scholars  are  divided  in 
opinion  as  to  whether  or  not  they  are  referred  to  in 
the  Talmud. 

*  British  Quarterly  Review^  April,  1881,  p.  338. 


152  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

A  few  more  particular  remarks  may  now  be  made 
on  the  subject  of  existing  Hebrew  manuscripts. 
From  time  to  time  rumours  are  circulated  that  some 
very  ancient  copies  have  been  discovered.  But 
nothing  practical  has  resulted  from  these  reported 
discoveries.  So  far  as  is  yet  known,  the  most  ancient 
Hebrew  manuscripts  cannot  be  dated  much  higher 
than  the  tenth  century.  And,  even  at  the  present 
day,  the  principles  on  which  the  age  of  such  docu- 
ments ought  to  be  settled  have  not  been  agreed 
upon  by  scholars.  The  science  of  Old  Testament 
textual  criticism  is  still  in  a  comparatively  imperfect 
condition,  so  that  little  can  with  certainty  be  said 
as  to  the  value  or  antiquity  of  extant  manuscripts. 
The  following  brief  account  of  the  matter  by  an 
English  and  a  German  writer  must  here  suffice  : — 

"  In  computing  the  number  of  known  MSS.,"  says 
Mr.  Thrupp,  *'  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  by  far 
':he  greater  part  contain  only  portions  of  the  Bible. 
Of  the  581  Jewish  MSS.  collated  by  Kennicott,  not 
more  than  102  give  the  Old  Testament  complete, 
with  those  of  De  Rossi  the  case  is  similar.  In  Ken- 
nicott's  volumes,  the  MSS.  used  for  each  book  are 
distinctly  enumerated  at  the  end  of  the  book.  The 
number  collated  by  Kennicott  and  De  Rossi  together 
were,  for  the  Book  of  Genesis,  490  ;  for  the  Megilloth 
(including  the  books  of  Ruth,  Esther,  Proverbs,  the 
Song  of  Solomon,    and  Lamentations)  collectively, 


THE    TEXT  OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.     153 

549  :  for  the  Psalms,  495  ;  for  Ezra  and  Nehemiah, 
172;  and  for  the  Chronicles,  211.  Manuscript 
authority  is  most  plenteous  for  the  Book  of  Esther, 
least  so  for  those  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  Since  the 
days  of  Kennicott  and  De  Rossi,  modern  research 
has  discovered  various  MSS.  beyond  the  limits  of 
Europe.  Of  many  of  these  there  seems  no  reason 
to  suppose  that  they  will  add  much  to  our  knowledge 
of  the  Hebrew  text.  Those  found  in  China  are  not 
essentially  different  in  character  from  the  MSS. 
previously  known  in  Europe  :  that  brought  by  Bucha- 
nan from  Malabar  is  now  supposed  to  be  a  European 
roll."*  Strack,  a  recent  German  writer,  has  enu- 
merated and  described  the  most  ancient  and  valuable 
Hebrew  manuscripts  which  are  known  to  exist.  He 
refers  to  the  following :  (i.)  That  of  Ben  Asher, 
who  lived  at  Tiberias  in  the  tenth  century.  This 
MS.  is  described  as  the  most  celebrated  and  valuable 
of  all,  and  has  had  a  very  dominant  influence  in  the 
formation  of  the  received  text,  (ii.)  A  MS.  of  the 
ProphetSj  said  to  have  been  written  in  the  year 
827.  (iii.)  A  IMS.  of  the  later  prophets,  undoubtedly 
ancient,  now  in  the  British  Museum,  (iv.)  Two  an- 
cient MSS.,  said  to  be  at  Damascus,  but  which  have 
not  yet  been  accurately  collated,  (v.)  The  MSS. 
of  Kennicott,  already  described,     (vi.)  The  MSS.  of 


Smith's  Diet,  of  Bible,  art.  Old  Test.,  p.  604. 


154  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

De  Rossi,  four  of  which  are  supposed  to  date  from 
the  eighth  to  the  eleventh  century,  (vii.)  The  MSS. 
preserved  at  Odessa,  one  of  which,  written  on 
deerskin,  and  containing  the  law  complete,  is  said 
to  have  been  written  before  580  a.d.  But  these 
Odessan  MSS.  still  await  full  examination,  (viii.) 
The  great  collection  of  MSS.  made  by  Firkowitz, 
nearly  half  a  century  ago,  and  now  in  the  Imperial 
Library  at  St.  Petersburg.  Some  of  these  are  said 
to  be  very  ancient,  but  as  yet  very  little  is  known 
with  certainty  regarding  them.* 

It  thus  appears  that  there  is  no  inconsiderable 
amount  of  available  manuscript  wealth,  which  still 
remains  to  be  turned  to  full  account.  Those  copies 
which  have  had  a  Karaite  origin  should  especially 
be  examined  with  great  care.  The  Karaites  are  a 
sect  of  Jews  who  attach  supreme  importance  to  the 
written  law,  and  reject  mere  oral  traditions.  There 
is  reason,  therefore,  to  expect  that  their  manuscripts 
of  the  sacred  books  may  exhibit  a  text  differing,  to 
some  extent,  from  that  of  the  Massorets.  It  is  not 
likely,  however,  that  much  change  will  require  to  be 
made  on  the  Hebrew  text  as  now  received,  even 
after  all  the  manuscript  materials  for  criticism  which 
exist  have  been  subjected  to  the  most  sifting 
examination. 

*  Proleg.  Ciit.  in  Vet.  Test.  Hebraic,  p.  43. 


THE    TEXT  OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.     155 

One  further  remark  may  be  made  respecting  the 
text  of  the  Old  Testament.  It  used  to  be  main- 
tained that  the  Jews  had,  in  several  places,  wilfully 
corrupted  it,  in  order  to  weaken  the  argument  de- 
rived from  it  in  favour  of  Christianity.  This  charge 
is  as  old  as  the  days  of  Justin  Martyr,  who  lived  in 
the  early  part  of  the  second  century.  That  primitive 
Father  of  the  Church  alleges  in  his  **  Dialogue  with 
Trypho,"  that  the  Jews  had  cut  out  from  Ps.  xcvi. 
10,  the  words,  **from  the  wood."  He  would  have 
the  verse  to  run  thus  :  '*  Say  among  the  heathen,  The 
Lord  reigneth  yr(?;;2  the  wood ;^^  and  he  affirms  that 
these  last  three  words  had  been  excised  by  the  Jews 
because  of  their  clear  reference  to  the  cross  of 
Christ.*  But  there  is  not  the  slightest  ground  for 
such  an  allegation.  As  Otto  has  remarked,  it  is 
far  more  likely  that  the  words  were  inserted  by  some 
Christian,  than  that  they  were  cut  out  by  the  Jews. 
And  the  many  charges  of  a  similar  kind  made  by 
the    early    Fathers     seem    all     equally    baseless,  f 


*  Dial,  cum  Tryph.  Jud.,  chap,  Ixxiii. 

f  The  most  remarkable  passage,  after  that  referred  to  above, 
is  the  following,  which  was  said  to  have  been  cut  out  from  the 
text  of  Jeremiah  : — "  And  the  holy  Lord  remembered  His  dead 
Israel,  wdio  had  fallen  asleep  in  the  land  of  sepulture,  and  de- 
scended to  them  to  preach  the  salvation  which  is  from  Him,  that 
He  might  save  them."  Justin  Martyr  expressly  accuses  the 
Jews  of  having  excised  this  passage,  and  Irenaeus  frequently 
quotes  it.     But,  as  Harvey  has  remarked,  **the  fact  that 


156  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION, 

Scholars  are  now  generally  agreed  that  there  is  no 
reason  to  believe  that  the  Jews  at  any  time  mutilated 
the  sacred  text.  De  Wette*  observes  with  much 
force,  that,  had  they  allowed  themselves  to  do  so, 
this  must  have  appeared  in  their  bitter  controversies 
with  the  Samaritans.  But,  on  the  contrary,  it  was 
their  opponents  who  altered  the  words  of  Scripture, 
in  order  to  obtain  some  seeming  support  for  the 
peculiar  views  which  they  had  adopted.  In  the 
fidelity  with  which  the  Jews  thus  acted,  we  find  a 
strong  confirmation  of  the  belief  that  they  have 
banded  down  to  us  a  generally  sound  and  genuine 
text,  so  far  as  that  was  in  their  own  possession. 
But,  as  we  shall  see  in  the  following  chapters, 
ancient  versions  still  remain  to  be  more  carefully 
and  critically  studied,  with  a  view  to  the  more 
definite  ascertainment  of  the  primitive  Hebrew 
text. 

not  only  ignored  in  the  Hebrew  text,  but  also  in  the  LXX.,  the 
Vulgate,  the  Hexapla.  the  Targums,  and  all  other  ancient 
versions  of  Scripture,  is  a  conclusive  proof  of  its  spuriousness" — 
Irenirus,  ii.  109. 

*  Eim.  in  das  AlL  7 "est.,  s.  84. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE  SEPTUAGINT  AND    THE  SAMARITAN 
PENT  A  TEUCH. 

I  BRING  the  Septuagint  and  the  Samaritan 
Pentateuch  together  in  the  same  chapter  for 
two  reasons, — first,  because  they  were  both  formed 
before  the  coming  of  Christ,  and  secondly,  because, 
as  we  shall  see,  they  have  a  very  close  connection 
with  each  other.* 

Hardly  any  event  in  the  history  of  the  world  can 
be  deemed  more  providential  than  the  formation  of 
the  Greek  version  of  the  Old  Testament.  The 
Hebrew  language  was  always  confined  within  a  very 
narrow  territory;  and  so  long  as  Divine  revelation 
continued  locked  up  in  that  tongue,  it  could  become 
known  only  to  comparatively  few  of  the  members  of 
our  race.  But,  under  the  wise  government  of  the 
Almighty,  provision    had'  been   made,    long   before 

*  The  Samaritan  Pentateuch  is  a  recension  rather  than  a 
version,  since  its  language  is  substantially  the  same  as  the 
Hebrew. 


158  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION, 

the  coming  of  Christ,  for  the  easy  and  rapid  spread 
of  the  Gospel  message  throughout  the  whole  civil- 
ized world,  as  soon  as  the  fulness  of  time  arrived. 
The  Septuagint  translation  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures 
had  been  gradually  formed  at  Alexandria,  between 
the  third  and  first  century  before  Christ,  and  was 
everywhere  current  among  the  Jews  at  the  date  of 
our  Saviour's  birth.  The  Old  Testament  Scriptures 
were  thus  thrown  open  to  the  whole  world ;  and 
as  the  New  Testament  was  throughout  written  in 
Greek,  the  whole  of  the  sacred  volume,  so  far  as 
its  contents  were  collected  and  circulated,  thus 
became  intelligible  to  almost  every  one  within  the 
vast  bounds  of  the  Roman  Empire.  It  is  well  worth 
our  while  to  pause  here  for  a  little,  and  consider 
how  widely  a  knowledge  of  the  Greek  language 
had  been  spread  throughout  the  world  before  the 
commencement  of  the  apostolic  age.  We  shall  thus 
see  how  wonderfully  the  way  had  been  prepared  for 
the  promulgation  of  divine  truth  among  all  nations, 
when  the  stream  of  spiritual  blessings  hitherto  con- 
fined, for  the  most  part,  to  the  land  of  Israel  was 
now  to  burst  its  barriers,  and  carry  its  life-giving 
waters  even  to  the  ends  of  the  earth. 

The  great  primary  cause  of  the  diff'usion  of  the 
Greek  language  was  the  conquest  of  the  East  by 
Alexander  the   Great.     Setting  out  from  his  native 


SEPTUA  GINT  6-  SAMARITAN  PENTA  TE UCH.     1 59 

Macedon  in  the  year  334  before  Christ,  the  youthful 
conqueror,  in  the  course  of  the  next  ten  years,  made 
himself  undisputed  master  of  the  whole  of  Asia. 
But  the  glory  which  he  acquired  was  far  greater 
than  that  of  a  mere  victor.  Everywhere  his  advance 
was  the  herald  of  civilization  and  culture.  Far  from 
being  satisfied  with  simply  destroying,  his  constant 
policy  was  to  improve  and  enlighten  the  countries 
which  he  subdued.  For  this  purpose,  cities  were 
built,  and  colonies  planted,  as  he  went  forward  in 
his  victorious  career ;  and  these,  of  course,  became 
centres  from  which  the  influence  of  Greek  civili- 
zation spread  with  ever-advancing  power.  At  his 
death,  the  immense  empire  owning  his  sway  was 
broken  up  into  a  number  of  Greek  kingdoms  which 
endured  for  centuries ;  and,  under  their  fostering 
care,  the  Hellenism,  which  he  had  done  so  much 
to  diffuse,  continued  more  and  more  to  acquire 
ascendency  throughout  the  earth. 

Accordingly,  when  we  glance  at  the  condition 
of  the  civilized  world  for  some  generations  before 
Christ,  we  see  that  it  had  become  almost  completely 
Hellenized.  We  look  at  Italy,  and  find  that,  as 
respects  art  and  literature,  "  captive  Greece  had 
captured  her  fierce  conqueror."  We  look  at  Egypt, 
and  we  find  that,  under  the  beneficent  rule  of  the 
Ptolemies,  Hellenic  culture  was  promoted  in  every 
possible  way,  and  carried  to   the  highest  pitch  of 


i6o  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

refinement.  We  look  at  Judeea  even,  and  we  find 
that,  more  than  a  century  before  Christ,  the  influence 
of  Greece  had  become  predominant ;  so  that,  as  the 
author  of  the  Second  Book  of  Maccabees  expresses 
it  (chap.  iv.  13),  **a  kind  of  acme  of  Hellenism" 
then  prevailed  in  the  country. 

Alexandria  in  Egypt  was  especially  regarded  as 
the  metropolis  of  Greek  learning.  Vast  numbers  0{ 
Jews  had  settled  in  that  city.  They  formed,  indeed, 
one  of  the  three  bodies  constituting  the  original 
colonists,  the  other  two  elements  consisting  of 
Greeks  and  Egyptians.  The  Jews  had  a  district  and 
a  governor  of  their  own  ;  and  as  Philo,  himself  an 
Alexandrian  Jew,  informs  us,  were  in  possession  of 
special  rights  and  immunities.  Now,  among  these 
thoroughly  Hellenized  Jews,  few  of  whom  under- 
stood a  word  of  Hebrew,  there  would  speedily 
spring  up  a  natural  desire  to  possess  their  sacred 
books  in  the  language  with  which  alone  they  were 
familiar.  This  feeling  sufficiently  accounts  for  the 
undoubted  fact  that,  towards  the  close  of  the  third 
century  before  Christj  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  began 
to  be  translated  into  Greek  at  Alexandria,  and  that 
the  work  was  gradually  carried  forward,  until  what 
is  known  as  the  Septuagint  version  was  at  last 
completed. 

But  a  much  more  romantic  account  than  this  has 
descended  to  us  from  antiquity,  with  respect  to  the 


SEPTUA  GINT  &-  SA  MARITAN  PENT  A  TE  UCH.    1 6 1 

origin  of  the  Septuagint  translation.  In  a  letter 
purporting  to  have  been  written  by  Aristeas  or 
Aristeus,  to  his  brother  Philocrates,  we  are  told  that 
the  work  was  due  to  the  desire  of  Ptolemy  Phila- 
delphus  to  have  a  copy  in  Greek  of  the  sacred 
writings  of  the  Jews,  for  the  further  enrichment  of 
that  famous  library  which,  in  B.C.  273,  had  been 
established  at  Alexandria.  With  this  view,  he  sent 
the  writer  Aristeas,  who  held  a  high  position  at  his 
court,  and  Andreas,  captain  of  his  guards,  to  Jeru- 
salem, to  beg  the  assistance  of  the  high  priest  in 
carrying  his  wish  into  fulfilment.  They  presented 
rich  presents  to  the  Temple,  and  easily  obtained 
from  Eleazar  an  authorised  copy  of  the  law,  which, 
says  the  account,  was  wTitten  in  letters  of  gold, 
along  with  six  interpreters  from  each  of  the  twelve 
tribes.  On  reaching  Alexandria,  the  interpreters 
were  invited  to  a  banquet  which  lasted  seven 
days,  and  then  had  lodgings  assigned  them  in 
the  island  of  Pharos,  where,  after  mutual  com- 
parison, they  finished  their  work  in  the  space  of 
seventy-two  days.  Later  accounts  affirm  that  the 
translators  did  not  confer  with  each  other  at  all, 
but  carried  on  their  work  separately,  or,  as  some 
say,  in  pairs,  and  then  met  on  an  appointed  day,  in 
the  presence  of  the  king,  to  exhibit  the  versions 
which  they  had  produced.  It  is  added  that,  when 
these  were  compared,  they  were  found  in  every  point 

II 


1 62  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

exactly  to  agree ;  and  the  work  was  therefore,  of 
necessity,  believed  to  have  been  the  result  of  divine 
inspiration. 

No  word  need  be  said  to  prove  that  this  narrative 
is,  to  some  extent  at  least,  fabulous.  The  professed 
letter  of  Aristeas  is  now  generally  believed  to  be  a 
fabrication,  though  it  was  accepted  as  genuine  by 
Josephus  and  by  the  Fathers  of  the  Church.  But 
it  is  difficult  to  conclude  that  the  account  has  not 
some  foundation  in  fact.  Not  improbably,  Ptolemy, 
who  was  a  most  enlightened  and  liberal  prince, 
hearing  of  the  desire  of  his  Jewish  subjects  to  pos- 
sess a  version  of  their  sacred  books  in  the  Greek 
language,  encouraged  the  design,  and  took  some 
steps  to  aid  in  its  accomplishment.  The  statement' 
that  seventy-two  learned  Jews  were,  at  his  request, 
sent  from  Jerusalem  to  Alexandria,  to  carry  out  the 
work,  has  nothing  incredible  about  it ;  and  the 
name  which  the  version  has  always  borne  is  thus 
naturally  accounted  for,  it  having  been  styled,  in 
round  numbers,  from  the  earliest  times,  the  Septua- 
gint — the  Seventy. 

But  whatever  may  be  thought  of  this,  the  un- 
doubted facts  are,  that  the  Greek  version  was  formed 
at  Alexandria — that  it  was  begun  under  the  Ptolemies 
about  280  B.C.,  that  the  Pentateuch  was  first  trans- 
lated, circulating  for  a  time  by  itself — and  that  the 
translation   of  the  remaining  books  was   gradually 


SEPTUAGINT  6-  SAMARITAN  PENTATEUCH.    163 

carried    forward,    until    the    work    stood    complete 
several  generations  before  Christ. 

And  now  the  important  inquiry  arises — In  what 
esteem  was  the  Septuagint  version  held  by  the  Jews 
of  the  Apostolic  age,  and  by  the  early  Fathers  of 
the  Christian  Church  ?  Those  who  have  really 
investigated  this  subject  have  happily  now  no  diffi- 
culty in  replying  to  these  questions.  The  ridicu- 
lous notions  once  prevalent,  as  to  the  hatred 
which  the  Jews  entertained  towards  the  Greek 
version,  are  now  thoroughly  exploded.  No  doubt 
they  received  some  sanction  from  certain  passages 
in  the  Talmud,  but  these  were  the  utterances  of 
an  age  too  late  to  have  any  weight  in  deciding 
the  matter,  and  of  persons  who  spoke  and  wrote 
under  the  influence  of  hopeless  prejudice.  It  is 
lamentable,  however,  to  find  how  such  misrepre- 
sentations were,  until  recently,  repeated  by  some  of 
the  ablest  writers  in  our  country.  The  late  Dean 
Stanley,  for  example,  gave  his  countenance  to  the 
fable  that  "the  Jews  of  Palestine  .  .  .  held  that 
on  the  day  on  which  the  seventy  translators  met  a 
supernatural  darkness  overspread  the  earth  ;  and  the 
day  was  to  them  one  of  their  solemn  periods  of 
fasting  and  humiliation."*    As  is  well  known  to  all 


*  Lectures  on  the  Jewish  Church,  i.,  p.  xxxv.     Although  the 
worthy  Dean  was  thus  betrayed  into  the  acceptance  of  a  pre- 


i64  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

that  have  looked  carefully  into  the  subject,  these 
notions  are  utterly  baseless.  They  rest  on  some 
Talmudical  statements,  which  are  in  thorough  con- 
tradiction to  other,  and  far  more  trustworthy, 
announcements  contained  in  the  Talmud  itself. 
As  might  be  expected  from  the  nature  of  that  vast 
collection  of  Jewish  thought,  feeling,  and  specu- 
lation, the  most  inconsistent  views  on  various 
subjects  are  often  found  presented  in  its  pages.* 
But  all  competent  inquirers  are  now  agreed  as  to 
the  judgment  which  its  most  ancient  statements  of 
opinion  lead  us  to  form  with  respect  to  the  esteem 
in  which  the  Septuagint  version  was  held  by  the 
Jews  of  the  apostolic  age.  This  will  be  made  plain 
from  the  following  quotations. 

The  opinion  of  Rabbi  Symeon,  who  was  a  con- 
temporary of  Josephus,  is  quoted  in  the  Talmud  to 
the  following   effect,    "that   it  was  lawful   to  write 

vailing  delusion,  never  was  there  a  writer  more  willing  to 
acknowledge  his  mistakes  and  to  correct  them.  I  cannot  help 
stating,  in  illustration,  that  in  one  of  the  last  letters  I  received 
from  him,  referring  to  the  statement  which  he  had  made  in  his 
Sermons  in  the  East,  that  in  the  synagogue  at  Nazareth  "  the 
roll  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  was  delivered  to  Christ,"  he 
frankly  said  that  such  words  were  written  "  in  the  days  of  his 
ignorance,"  and  that  they  should  be  corrected  in  any  subsequent 
edition.  Thus  willing  was  he  to  abandon  opinions  which  he 
had  come  to  see  were  not  in  accordance  with  truth.  Utinani 
sic  ojnnes  ! 

*  See  chap.  xi.  for  an  account  of  the  Talmud. 


SEPTUA  GINT  6-  SAMARITAN  PENTA  TE  UCH.    1 65 

down  the  sacred  Scriptures,  and  to  read  them  in 
public,  only  in  the  Greek  language,  and  not  in  foreign 
tongues."  This  is  the  kind  of  feeling  expressed 
by  all  the  early  Rabbinical  writers.  Accordingly, 
Frankel,  a  modern  Jewish  scholar,  who  has  devoted 
great  attention  to  the  subject,  declares  that  the 
Septuagint  is  habitually  referred  to  in  the  Talmud 
in  terms  of  the  highest  respect.*  "Early  Rabbinical 
tradition,"  says  Dr.  R.  Smith,  *'  expressly  recognises 
the  Greek  version  as  legitimate."!  Stronger  lan- 
guage might  warrantably  be  used,  for  in  some  pas- 
sages of  the  Talmud  it  is  even  implied  that  the 
Septuagint  was  divinely  inspired.  Such  passages 
reflect  the  feelings  of  the  Jews  at  the  beginning  of 
our  era :  why  different  sentiments  were  at  a  later 
period  expressed  with  regard  to  the  Greek  version 
will  afterwards  be  noticed. 

As  to  the  opinion  of  the  Alexandrian  translation 
entertained  by  Christ  and  His  Apostles,  the  best 
evidence  is  furnished  by  the  use  which  is  made  of  it 
in  the  New  Testament.  We  find  that  it  was  the 
Bible  which  they  constantly  employed  ;  %   and  they 

*    Vorstudien  zii  der  Septuaginta,  p.  61. 

f  The  Old  Test,  in  yeiuish  Church,  p.  loi. 

X  This  point  is,  in  several  respects,  so  interesting  and  impor- 
tant, that  I  have  devoted  the  whole  of  the  following  chapter  to 
its  consideration.  It  has,  of  course,  a  weighty  bearing  on  the 
question  as  to  the  authority  to  be  ascribed  to  the  Septuagint  in 
determining  the  genuine  Hebrew  text. 


1 66  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

thus,  in  the  most  emphatic  and  practical  way,  at- 
tached to  it  the  stamp  of  their  approbation.  The 
same  continued  to  be  the  case  in  the  early  Christian 
Church.  All  the  primitive  Fathers,  such  as  Clement 
of  Rome,  Ignatius,  Justin  Martyr,  and  Irenaeus, 
rested  exclusively  upon  the  Greek  version  for  their 
knowledge  and  use  of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures. 
And  they  had  the  very  highest  estimate  of  its 
authority  and  value.  This  comes  out  again  and 
again  in  the  writings  of  Irenaeus.  Thus  he  says  in 
one  passage,  that  **  even  the  Gentiles  present,"  when 
the  Septuagint  translation  was  presented  to  King 
Ptolemy,  **  perceived  that  the  Scriptures  had  been 
interpreted  by  the  inspiration  of  God  ; "  and  he  goes 
on  to  claim  for  the  renderings  of  the  version  an 
authority  as  decisive  as  that  of  the  Apostles  them- 
selves. *  This  continued  for  many  ages  to  be  the 
judgment  of  the  Christian  Church.  It  is  very  strongly 
expressed,  for  instance,  in  the  following  passage 
from  one  of  the  best  known  of  the  works  of  St. 
Augustine : — **  If  any  other  translator  of  the  Scrip- 
tures from  the  Hebrew  into  another  tongue  is  faith- 
ful, in  that  case  he  agrees  with  these  seventy  trans- 
lators ;  and  if  he  is  not  found  to  agree  with  them, 
then  we  ought  to  believe  that  the  prophetic  gift  is 
possessed  by  them.     For  the  same  Spirit  who  was 

*  Against  Heresies,  iii.  21,  2,  3. 


SEPTUAGINT  ^  SAMARITAN  PENTATEUCH.    167 

in  the  prophets  when  they  spake  those  things  was 
also  in  the  seventy  men  when  they  translated  them, 
so  that  unquestionably  they  had  power  also  to  say 
something  else  [of  their  own],  just  as  if  the  prophet 
him.self  had  said  both,  because  it  would  be  the  same 
Spirit  who  said  both ;  and  they  could  say  the  same 
thing  differently,  so  that,  although  the  words  were  not 
the  same,  yet  the  same  meaning  would  shine  forth 
to  those  of  sound  understanding ;  and  they  could 
omit  or  add  something,  so  that  even  by  this  it  might 
be  shown  that  there  was  in  that  work  not  a  human 
bondage,  which  the  translator  had  to  yield  to  the 
words,  but  rather  a  divine  power,  which  filled  and 
ruled  the  mind  of  the  translator."*'  The  Greek 
version  is  thus  placed  on  the  very  same  platform  of 
authority  with  the  Hebrew  original ;  and,  although 
we  may  not  be  disposed  to  acknowledge  its  claims 
to  such  a  position,  we  cannot  but  feel  that  a  work 
which  was  held  in  such  esteem  and  reverence  by  the 
early  Church  may  justly  demand  and  receive  the 
utmost  respect  at  the  present  day. 

In  modern  times,  however,  the  Septuagint  has 
lain  comparatively  neglected.  Sad  to  say,  no  satis- 
factory edition  of  it  yet  exists.     Its  text  still  awaits 

*  The  City  of  God,  xviii.  44.  As  is  well  known,  Augustine 
regarded  the  Septuagint  as  too  sacred  a  work  to  have  even  its 
errors  corrected,  and,  on  this  ground,  strongly  objected,  for  a 
V\me,  to  the  amendments  on  it  proposed  by  Jerome. 


1 68  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

critical  examination  and  adjustment ;  and  little  use, 
consequently,  has  as  yet  been  made  of  it  for  the 
correction  of  passages  manifestly  corrupt  in  the 
Hebrew.  But  scholars  are  now  awakening  to  the 
pre-eminent  value  which  would,  in  this  respect, 
belong  to  a  trustworthy  edition  of  the  Septuagint. 
When  we  reflect  that  it  represents  a  text  of  the  Old 
Testament  which  circulated  among  the  Jews  before 
the  days  of  Christ,  and  remember  that,  as  shown  in 
the  preceding  chapter,  our  present  Hebrew  text  must 
be  traced  back  to  a  single  original  copy,  we  cannot 
fail  to  be  impressed  with  the  unspeakable  value  which 
would  belong  to  a  critically  revised  text  of  the 
Septuagint  translation. 

If,  however,  we  look  at  the  version  as  it  at  present 
exists,  we  perceive  in  it  many  obvious  errors.  Some- 
times Hebrew  consonants  which  resemble  each 
other  in  shape  or  sound  have  been  mistaken,  the 
one  for  the  other ;  while,  again,  an  improper  vowel 
pointing  has  not  unfrequently  been  adopted.  At  the 
same  time,  when  discrepancies  appear  between  the 
Hebrew  and  Greek  texts,  the  error  is  by  no  means 
always  on  the  side  of  the  translation.  Many  passages 
occur,  in  which  even  the  existing  text  of  the  Septua- 
gint, confused  and  unsettled  as  it  so  largely  is,  must 
be  preferred  to  the  Hebrew,  as  we  now  have  it. 
Examples  are  to  be  found  in  Gen.  iv.  8,  where, 
instead  of  the  words,   "  And  Cain  talked  with  Abel 


SEPTUAGINT  6-  SAMARITAN  PENTATEUCH.    169 

his  brother,"  we  should  read,  "And  Cain  said  to 
Abel  his  brother,  Let  us  go  forth  into  the  field ;  " 
in  Exod.  ii.  25,  where,  for  **  and  had  respect  unto 
them,"  we  should  read,  **  and  was  made  known  unto 
them ;  "  in  Prov.  v.  16,  where  a  negative  ought  to  be 
inserted,  and  we  should  read,  "  Let  not  thy  waters 
overflow  from  thy  fountain ;  "  and  in  Nahum  iii.  8, 
where  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  are,  in  the  first  half 
of  the  verse,  totally  diff"erent.  It  is  greatly  to  be 
regretted  that  a  revised  and  improved  text  of  the 
Septuagint  should  not  have  been  prepared  before 
the  formation  of  a  revised  version  of  the  Old 
Testament  in  our  language.* 

We  now  proceed  to  a  brief  consideration  of  the 
Samaritan  Pentateuch. 

The  Jews  and  the  Samaritans,  in  their  relations  to 
each  other,  furnish  the  very  types  of  religious  bigotry 
and  hatred.  They  illustrate  the  saying  which  has 
been  too  often  verified,  that,  the  nearer  two  religious 


*  Additional  references  to  passages  in  which  the  Greek  text 
is  to  be  preferred  to  the  Hebrew  will  be  found  in  The  Old  Test, 
in  Jewish  Church,  pp.  91—99.  As  to  the  Septuagint  version 
generally,  Dr.  R.  Smith  well  remarks,  **The  translation  is  not 
of  equal  merit  throughout,  and  it  is  plain  that  different  parts  of 
the  Bible  were  rendered  into  Greek  by  men  of  varying  capacity  ; 
but,  in  general  ...  it  is  safe  to  say  that  the  translators  were 
men  of  competent  scholarship,  as  scholarship  then  went,  and  that 
they  did  their  work  faithfully,  and  in  no  arbitraiy  way  "  (p.  92). 


lyo  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

parties  approach  each  other,  the  bitterer  is  the 
mutual  animosity  which  they  cherish.  *'The  Jews 
have  no  dealings  with  the  Samaritans  "  (John  iv.  9) ; 
"They  went,  and  entered  into  a  village  of  the 
Samaritans,  to  make  ready  for  Him  ;  and  they  did  not 
receive  Him,  because  His  face  was  as  though  He 
would  go  to  Jerusalem"  (Luke  ix.  52,  53).  ''  Say  we 
not  well  that  Thou  art  a  Samaritan,  and  hast  a  devil  ?" 
(John  viii.  48.)  Such  are  some  passages  which  indi- 
cate the  deep-rooted  enmity  and  prejudice  existing 
between  co-religionists,  like  the  Jews  and  Samaritans, 
and  which  restrained  them,  as  much  as  possible,  from 
holding  fellowship  with  one  another. 

This  rancorous  spirit  was  unhappily  fostered,  from 
generation  to  generation,  by  a  difference  which 
existed  in  their  religious  books.  The  Samaritans 
accepted  as  sacred  only  the  Pentateuch,  maintain- 
ing, as  one  of  their  leading  principles,  that  "  there 
is  no  prophet  but  Moses,"  and  branding  the  other 
scriptural  writers  with  the  most  opprobrious  epithets. 
Thus  Samuel  is  declared  to  have  been  *'a  magician 
and  an  infidel,"  and  Ezra  is  described  as  being 
**  cursed  for  ever."  The  law,  however,  as  accepted 
by  the  Samaritans,  was,  in  all  essential  particulars, 
identical  with  that  of  the  Jews.  A  few  variations 
occur,  of  which  the  following,  as  most  important, 
may  be  noticed  : — 

In  Deut.  xxvii.  4,  Gertzim  is  substituted  for  Ebal, 


SEPTUA  GINT  6-  SAMARITAN  PENT  A  TE  UCH.     1 7 1 

and  reads  thus,  "  It  shall  be  when  ye  be  gone  over 
Jordan,  that  ye  shall  set  up  these  stones  which  I 
command  you  this  day  on  Mount  Gerizim."  This 
change  appears  obviously  to  have  been  made  in  the 
interest  of  Samaritan  notions  as  to  the  holiness  of 
Mount  Gerizim,  on  which  their  temple  was  built. 
Some  Biblical  scholars,  however,  among  whom  was 
not  only  the  eccentric  Whiston,  but  the  great 
Hebrew  palaeographer  Kennicott,  have  held  that 
Gerizim  is  the  correct  reading,  and  that  Ebal  is  a 
corruption  introduced  by  the  Jews,  But  *'  this  sup- 
position," says  Deutsch,  "  is  completely  given  up  by 
modern  Biblical  scholars,  although,"  he  adds,  "it 
cannot  be  denied  that  there  is  some  prima  facie 
ground  for  a  doubt  upon  the  subject.""^*  A  very 
remarkable  emendation  of  the  Hebrew  text  occurs 
in  Exod.  xii.  40.  The  following  words,  printed  in 
italics,  form  an  important  supplement  to  the  passage 
as  it  stands  in  our  common  version : — "  Now  the 
sojourning  of  the  children  of  Israel,  and  of  their 
fathers,  which  they  sojourned  in  the  la7id  of  Canaan  and 
in  the  land  of  Egypt,  was  four  hundred  and  thirty 
years."  The  Septuagint  has  the  same  reading,  and 
there  appear  to  be  good  reasons  for  its  acceptance. 
In  fact,  the  statement  made  in  our  English  version, 
based  upon  the  Hebrew,  is  incorrect.  The  actual 
•  '  ~™ 

*  Deutsch,  Lit.  Rem.,  p.  417. 


172  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION, 

stay  of  the  children  of  Israel  in  Egypt  did  not 
amount  to  more  than  two  hundred  and  fifteen  years. 
St.  Paul,  following,  as  usual,  the  Septuagint,  gives  the 
right  chronology  in  Gal.  iii.  17;  and  there  seems 
no  difficulty  in  understanding  why,  in  a  mere  rhe- 
torical passage,  the  period  should  be  referred  to  in 
round  numbers  in  Acts  vii.  6,  as  having  embraced 
four  hundred  years.  Other  variations  from  the 
Hebrew  text  are  found  in  the  dates  of  events  in  the 
lives  of  the  patriarchs,  and  in  other  minute  points  of 
comparatively  little  consequence. 

Though  the  language  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch 
is  substantially  the  same  as  the  Hebrew,  the  form 
of  the  letters  used  in  it  is  totally  different.  It  is 
written  in  the  old  Samaritan  characters,  the  same, 
or  nearly  the  same  with  those  which  appear  on  the 
so-called  Maccabean  shekels  which  have  survived 
till  our  day.  This  was  probably  the  character  in 
general  use  among  the  Jews  before  their  adoption 
of  the  square  Hebrew  letters,  so  familiar  to  us  in 
modern  printed  editions  of  the  Old  Testament. 

Notwithstanding  that  several  references  to  the 
Samaritan  Pentateuch  are  found  in  the  writings  of 
the  Fathers,  it  was  not  till  the  beginning  of  the 
seventeenth  century  that  copies  of  it  were  brought 
to  Europe.  About  sixteen  nearly  complete  manu- 
scripts are  now  accessible,  along  with  a  number  of 
fragments,  more  or  less  important. 


SEPTUAGINT  ^  SAMARITAN  PENTATEUCH.    173 

When  first  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  became 
known  to  Europeari  scholars,  a  very  fierce  controversy 
arose  as  to  its  value,  and  raged  for  almost  two  hun- 
dred years.  Some  maintained  that  it  was  far  superior 
to  the  Massoretic  text  adopted  in  our  ordinary 
versions.  They  would  have  had  the  Samaritan 
followed  throughout,  although  it  should  surely  have 
been  manifest  that  it  had  altered  readings  under  the 
influence  of  a  dogmatic  bias,  as,  e.g.^  in  constantly 
substituting  God  ''has  chosen,"  for  **  will  choose," 
a  place  for  His  worship,  to  indicate  that  Mount 
Gerizim,  on  which  the  temple  of  the  Samaritans 
stood,  was  the  spot  which  had  been  pointed  out  to 
Moses  as  the  place  selected  for  the  worship  of 
Jehovah.  It  was  not  until  1815  that  the  relative 
merit  of  the  Hebrew  and  Samaritan  text  was  conclu- 
sively settled.  In  that  year  the  celebrated  Hebraist, 
Gesenius,  published  a  work  upon  the  subject,  which 
scattered  to  the  winds  those  claims  which  had  been 
so  persistently  urged  in  favour  of  the  Samaritan 
recension,  and  placed  on  a  secure  basis  the  general 
superiority  of  the  Massoretic  text. 

To  this  day,  hardly  anything  absolutely  certain 
is  known  as  to  the  age  or  origin  of  the  Samaritan 
Pentateuch.  Many  points  remain  to  be  more  fully 
investigated,  before  satisfaction  can  be  reached  on 
these  questions.  Known  manuscripts  must  be  ex- 
amined   and    compared   with    greater    care.      The 


174  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 


history  of  the  Samaritan  people  must  be  inquired 
into  with  deeper  research.  Search  must  be  made  for 
more  ancient  copies  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch, 
than  those  which  are  as  yet  possessed.  None  of 
the  manuscripts  at  present  in  Europe  can  claim  a 
higher  date  than  the  tenth  century  after  Christ,  but 
others,  of  far  greater  antiquity,  are  probably  still  in 
existence.  The  Samaritans  claim  an  absurdly  high 
age  for  the  scroll  still  in  use  at  Nablous,  but  that 
copy  probably  is  possessed  of  a  very  considerable 
antiquity.  It  is  astonishing  how  tenaciously  the 
people  of  Samaria  have  always  kept  themselves  dis- 
tinct from  the  Jews,  and  maintained  their  peculiar 
religious  observances,  even  down  to  our  day.  They 
are  now  reduced  to  about  two  hundred  persons,  but 
still  cling  to  the  ancient  home  of  their  race  at 
Shechem,  afterwards,  with  a  slight  change  of  site, 
called  Neapolis,  which  name  survives  in  the  form 
Nablous,  by  which  the  place  is  known  at  the  present 
day.  The  Samaritans  of  our  Lord's  day  have  been 
described  as  **a  people  distinct  from  the  Jews, 
though  lying  in  the  very  midst  of  the  Jews ;  a  people 
preserving  their  identity,  though  seven  centuries  had 
rolled  away  since  they  had  been  brought  from  Assy- 
ria by  Esarhaddon,  and  though  they  had  abandoned 
their  polytheism  for  a  sort  of  ultra-Mosaicism  ;  a 
people  who,  though  their  limits  had  been  gradually 
contracted,  and  the  rallying- place  of  their  religion 


SEPTUA  GINT  &-  SAMARITAN  PENT  A  TE  UCH.    175 

on  Mount  Gerizim  had  been  destroyed  one  hundred 
and  sixty  years  before,  by  John  Hyrcanus  (b.c.  130), 
and  though  Samaria,  the  city,  had  been  again  and 
again  destroyed,  and  though  their  territory  had  been 
the  battle-field  of  Syria  and  Egypt — still  preserved 
their  nationality,  still  worshipped  from  Shechem  and 
their  other  impoverished  settlements  towards  their 
sacred  hill,  still  retained  their  nationality,  and  could 
not  coalesce  with  the  Jews."*  This  once  flourish- 
ing people,  springing  from  the  Cuthite  settlers  and 
the  remnants  of  the  ten  tribes  left  in  the  land,  with 
a  Bible  and  a  religion  so  peculiar,  have  now  dwindled, 
as  has  been  said,  into  a  very  small  community,  but 
even  now  preserve  their  ancient  peculiarities.  As 
a  modern  writer  has  remarked,  "Through  all  vicis- 
situdes, Gerizim,  the  oldest  sanctuary  in  Palestine, 
retained  its  sanctity  to  the  end.  Probably  in  no 
other  locality  has  the  same  worship  been  sustained 
with  so  little  change  or  interruption  for  so  great  a 
series  of  years  as  in  this  mountain,  from  the  time  of 
Abraham  to  the  present  day.  In  their  humble  syna- 
gogue, at  the  foot  of  the  mountain,  the  Samaritans 
still  worship, — the  oldest  and  the  smallest  sect  in 
the  world  :  distinguished  by  their  noble  physiognomy 
and  stately  appearance  from  all  other  branches  of 
the  race  of  Israel.     In  their  prostrations  at  the  ele- 

*  Smith's  Did.  of  Bible,  art.  Samaria. 


176  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

vation  of  their  revered  copy  of  the  Pentateuch,  they 
throw  themselves  on  their  faces  in  the  direction, 
not  of  priest  or  law,  or  any  object  within  the  build- 
ing, but  obliquely  towards  the  eastern  summit  of 
Mount  Gerizim.  And  up  the  side  of  the  mountain, 
and  on  its  long  ridge,  is  to  be  traced  the  pathway  by 
which  they  ascend  to  the  sacred  spots  where  they 
alone  of  all  the  Jewish  race  yearly  celebrate  the 
paschal  sacrifice."  * 

As  has  been  already  suggested,  it  is  impossible  to 
fix  with  certainty  the  date  at  which  the  Samaritan 
Pentateuch  was  formed  from  the  Hebrew.  But  a 
conjecture  may  be  hazarded,  as  perhaps  more  pro- 
bable than  any  other.  Chiefly  at  a  time  when  the 
Jews  and  Samaritans  were  at  variance  on  other 
grounds  might  a  difference  on  religious  points  be 
expected  to  arise  between  them.  Now  we  know 
that  a  very  hostile  spirit  was  evinced  by  the  one 
community  towards  the  other,  when  the  Jews  returned 
from  the  Babylonish  captivity,  and  set  about  rebuild- 
ing the  Temple  at  Jerusalem.  We  read  in  Ezra  iv. 
2 — 6,  that  the  Samaritans  requested  permission  to 
join  in  that  pious  labour,  declaring  that  they  served 
the  sajne  God  as  the  Jews,  and  had  done  so  since 
the  days  of  Esarhaddon.  But  they  were  resolutely 
excluded  from  the  work  by  Zerubbabel  and  the  rest 


Stanley's  Sinai  and  Palestifie,  p.  240. 


SEPTUA GINT  &-  SAMARITAN  PENTA  TEUCH.    177 

of  the  fathers  of  Israel.  The  consequence  was,  that 
they  contracted  a  spirit  of  bitter  enmity  against  the 
Jews,  and  sought  in  every  possible  way  to  hinder 
the  success  of  their  labours.  This,  then,  was  exactly 
the  time  at  which  a  religious  schism  might  be  ex- 
pected to  take  place.  Debarred  from  all  interest  in 
the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  the  Samaritans  built  a 
temple  of  their  own  on  Mount  Gerizim.  And,  out 
of  jealousy  of  the  Jews,  they  refused  to  acknowledge 
any  of  those  books  which  were  about  this  time 
added  to  the  Hebrew  canon ;  while,  from  some 
motive  or  another,  they  also  rejected  all  the  books 
which  had  found  a  place  in  it  after  the  books  of 
Moses.  We  may  thus  conclude  that,  about  450  B.C., 
the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  assumed  its  special  form, 
preserving,  in  substance,  the  Mosaic  legislation,  but 
being,  in  some  passages,  altered,  so  as  to  yield  a 
seeming  support  to  the  claims  of  the  Samaritans. 

As  to  the  undoubted  similarity  which  is  frequently 
found  to  exist  between  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch 
and  the  Septuagint,  it  is  very  difficult  to  suggest  a 
satisfactory  explanation.  The  problem  is  a  highly 
complicated  one.  For,  while  it  is  true  that,  in  per- 
haps not  fewer  than  two  thousand  passages,  the 
Septuagint  and  Samaritan  Pentateuch  agree  in  read- 
ings different  from  those  of  the  common  Hebrew 
text,  it  is  no  less  true   that   the  Septuagint,  more 

12 


I7S  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

frequently  still,  agrees  with  the  Hebrew  against  the 
Samaritan,  and,  even  where  it  does  deviate  from  the 
Massoretic  text,  refuses  to  follow  that  of  the  Sama- 
ritan Pentateuch.  The  problem  thus  suggested  still 
awaits  solution,  and  there  is  no  likelihood  of  its 
being  mastered  until  critical  editions  of  both  the 
rival  texts  have  been  produced.  Then  it  may  be 
seen  how  far  the  Septuagint  was  based  upon  the 
Samaritan  Pentateuch,  or  vice  verm;  and  to  what 
extent  either  or  both  may  be  safely  applied  for  the 
rectification  and  improvement  of  the  present  Hebrew 
text  of  the  Old  Testament, 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE  SEPTUAGINT—ITS  CONSTANT  USE  BY 
CHRIST  AND  HIS  APOSTLES. 

EVERYWHERE  in  the  Gospels  and  Epistles 
we  meet  with  references  to  the  Scriptures 
of  the  Old  Testament.  The  word  occurs  about 
fifty  times  in  the  writings  of  the  Evangelists  and 
Apostles.  It  is  used  with  reference  to  both  high 
and  low,  rich  and  poor,  learned  and  unlearned, 
among  the  Jews.  "  Did  ye  never  read  in  the  Scrip- 
tures }  "  was  a  question  which  could  be  asked  with 
the  utmost  point  by  Christ,  in  speaking  to  His 
countrymen,  whether  priests  or  people.  He  could 
say,  "Search  (or  **  Ye  search")  the  Scriptures 
(John  V.  39)  in  more  immediately  addressing  the 
leaders  of  thought  in  Judea;  and  His  humble  disci- 
ples were  in  circumstances  to  have  it  said  regarding 
themselves  (Luke  xxiv.  27),  that  "  He  expounded 
unto  them  in  all  the  Scriptures  the  things  concerning 
Himself."  Christ  could,  in  His  addresses  to  the 
common  people,  familiarly  cite  texts  from  the  Scrip- 
tures (Mark  xii.  36),  with  perfect  assurance  that  Hi-; 


i8o  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

hearers  possessed  the  means  of  verifying  His  word  ; 
and  the  Jews,  again,  could  readily  quote  from  the 
same  sacred  source  (John  vi.  31)  in  the  presence 
of  His  disciples  (ver.  60),  all  classes  having  mani- 
festly an  easy  access  to,  and  an  intimate  acquaint- 
ance with,  the  contents  of  the  Old  Testament. 

The  Scriptures,  then — that  is,  a  written  copy  of 
the  whole  Old  Testament — evidently  circulated  in 
Palestine  in  the  times  of  Christ.  That,  I  suppose, 
will  be  admitted  to  be  as  clear  as  any  point  possibly 
can  be.  All  the  Jews,  of  whatever  station,  then  had, 
or  might  have,  in  their  hands  the  whole  of  the  Old 
Testament  writings.  That  is  implied  in  almost 
every  chapter  of  the  Gospels,  and  will,  I  cannot 
but  believe,  be  universally  acknowledged.  In  what 
form,  then,  let  us  ask,  did  the  Bible  of  the  Jews 
then  circulate  among  them  ?  What  was  the  language 
through  which  they  obtained  that  knowledge  of  the 
Old  Testament,  which,  it  is  plain,  was  at  the  time 
commonly  possessed  } 

Before  investigation,  any  one  of  the  three  following 
answers  might  be  given  to  this  question.  Some 
might  reply  that  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures 
were  then  current  among  the  Jews  in  the  original 
Hebrew;  others,  that  they  were  circulated  in  an 
Aramaic  translation ;  and  others,  that  they  were 
generally  known  only  by  means  0/  the  Septuagint 
version.     We  have  now  to  consider  which  of  these 


THE  SEPTUAGINT.  i8i 

three   views    can  be  shown  to  be  the  only  one  in 
accordance  with  the  facts  of  the  case. 

First,  then,  as  to  the  hypothesis  that  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures  circulated  among  the  Jews  of 
our  Saviour's  day  z>?  the  original  Hebrew. 

Ninety-nine  persons  out  of  a  hundred  probably 
imagine  that  such  was  the  case.  They  know  that 
the  Old  Testament  was  composed  in  Hebrew :  they 
believe  that,  as  a  matter  of  course,  the  Jews  spoke 
Hebrew  ;  and  so  the  question  is  settled, — the  Hebrew 
Bible  was  commonly  known  and  read  in  Palestine 
in  the  times  of  Christ.  This  idea  is,  no  doubt, 
popularly  kept  up  by  the  fact  that  we  several  times 
read  in  the  New  Testament  of  people  having  spoken 
in  Hebrew.  Thus,  in  Acts  xxi.  40,  we  are  told  that 
St.  Paul  addressed  the  Jews  "  in  the  Hebrew  tongue.' 
But,  as  every  scholar  knows,  that  was  a  very  different 
dialect  from  the  ancient  Hebrew,  in  which  the  books 
of  the  Old  Testament  were  composed.  This  is  now 
quite  a  commonplace  in  Biblical  discussions,  and 
will  hardly  bear  further  repetition.  It  has  recently 
been  expressed  as  follows  : — **  Long  before  the  time 
of  Christ,  the  Jews  had  ceased  to  speak  Hebrew. 
In  the  New  Testament,  no  doubt,  we  read  once  and 
again  of  the  •Hebrew  tongue  as  spoken  and  under- 
stood by  the  people  of  Palestine;  but  the  language 
which  is  called  Hebrew  in  the  New  Testament  was 


i82  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

a  dialect  as  unlike  to  the  Hebrew  of  the  Bible  as 
German  is  to  English — a  different  language,  although 
a  kindred  one.  This  language  is  called  Hebrew, 
because  it  was  spoken  by  the  Hebrews,  just  as  the 
Spanish  Jews  in  Constantinople  at  the  present  day 
call  their  Spanish  jargon  Hebrew.  It  was  a  kind 
of  Syriac  or  Aramaic,  which  the  Jews  had  gradually 
learned  in  place  of  Hebrew,  after  their  return  from 
captivity,  when  they  found  themselves  a  small  hand- 
ful living  in  the  midst  of  nations  who  spoke  Aramaic, 
and  with  whom  they  had  constant  dealings."  * 
To  quote  only  one  other  authority  on  this  subject, 
the  illustrious  German  scholar  Bleek,  referring  to 
the  times  of  Christ,  remarks,  **The  ancient  Hebrew 
had  already  for  a  long  time  been,  even  to  the  Jews 
of  Palestine,  a  dead  language,  the  knowledge  of 
which,  so  far  as  it  was  necessary  for  the  reading  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  continued  only  among  those 
who  were  devoted  to  such  a  special  study."  f  Ac- 
cordingly, we  find  that  even  Josephus,  who  prided 
himself  especially  on  his  Jewish  learning,  shows 
conclusively  in  his  works  that  he  had  only  a  very 
imperfect  acquaintance  with  ancient  Hebrew. 

Let  the  reader  mark,  then,  how  the  case  really 
stands.  The  Old  Testament  was  to  the  great 
majority  of  Jews,  in  our  Lord's  day,  a  sealed  book, 

^  T]t.e  Old  Test,  in  Jew.  Ck.,  p.  47.      f  Eml.  in  das  N.  T.,  p.  53. 


THE  SEPTUAGINT.  183 


so  far  as  its  original  language  was  concerned.  They 
knew  nothing  of  the  Old  Hebrew  tongue.  When 
confronted  with  it,  they  were  as  helpless  as  would 
be  an  Englishman,  acquainted  only  with  his  own 
language,  if  referred  to  the  Bible  in  German.  It 
is  obvious,  therefore,  that  *'the  Scriptures,"  so  often 
spoken  of,  and  appealed  to,  in  the  Gospels,  could 
not  have  been  the  Old  Testament  books  in  their 
original  language. 

Next,  however,  it  has  been  maintained  that  the 
sacred  writings  then  circulated  among  the  Jews 
in  an  Aramaic  translation. 

This  is  quite  a  common  supposition,  but  it  may 
easily  be  shown  to  be  baseless.  Let  the  reader 
only  consider  what  he  is  required  by  it  to  believe. 
He  is  asked  to  conceive,  first,  that  a  written  Aramaic 
version  of  the  whole  of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures 
existed  in  Palestine  during  the  times  of  Christ  and 
His  Apostles,  of  which  not  a  single  shred  has 
descended  to  our  day.  As  we  have  already  seen, 
the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  has  been  preserved 
throughout  all  the  ages  to  our  own  times,  but  it 
seems  that  a  version  of  the  whole  Old  Testament 
once  circulated  in  Palestine,  which  vanished  as 
completely  as  does  a  cloud  of  vapour  in  the  morning 
sky  I  He  is  asked  to  believe,  next,  in  the  existence 
of  an  Aramaic   version,   of  which,  apparently,   the 


1 84  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

great  Jewish  historian  never  heard.  As  has  been 
already  remarked,  Josephus  gives  a  particular 
account  of  the  formation  of  the  Septuagint,  and 
frequently  uses  it  in  his  writings;  but  he  is  dumb 
as  to  any  Aramaic  translation,  and,  so  far  as  it 
appears,  never  knew  of  its  existence !  He,  the 
modern  reader,  is  asked  to  believe,  thirdly,  that  an 
Aramaic  version  circulated  in  Palestine,  although 
none  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Church  make  the  faintest 
allusion  to  it,  or  preserve  to  us  the  slightest  speci- 
men of  its  contents.  We  know  how  zealously  such 
men  as  Origen  and  Jerome  devoted  themselves  to 
Biblical  studies,  and  how  deeply  interested  they 
were  in  all  that  bore  upon  their  successful  prose- 
cution. Yet  here,  \ve  are  told,  was  a  precious 
version  of  the  Old  Testament,  specially  precious 
as  having,  according  to  the  supposition,  been  the 
Bible  of  Christ  and  His  apostles,  which  these  great 
cholars  and  theologians  did  not  deem  worthy  of 
the  least  attention,  and  which  they  do  not  even 
mention  in  their  waitings !  He  is  asked  to  believe, 
finally — this  sore-tried  modern  reader — that  a  written 
Aramaic  version  of  the  Old  Testament  was  generally 
current  in  Palestine  during  the  lifetime  of  our  Lord, 
although  a  most  stringent  rule  prevailed  that  no 
such  version  should  be  formed.  The  interpreter 
was  solemnly  enjoined  *' '  not  to  use  a  written  Targum^ 
but  to  deliver  his  translation  viva  voce^  lest  it  might 


THE  SEPTUAGINT,  185 

appear  that  he  was  reading  out  of  the  Torah  (the 
Law)  itself,  and  thus  the  Scriptures  be  held  respon- 
sible for  what  were  his  own  dicta"  So  profound 
was  this  detestation  of  written  versions  in  Aramaic, 
that  we  are  told  that  Gamaliel  the  elder,  who  lived 
in  the  first  century  of  our  era,  having  heard  of  such 
a  translation  of  the  Book  of  Job  "  caused  it  to  be 
hidden  and  buried  out  of  sight."  *  Yet,  in  spite  of 
all  this,  we  are  required  to  believe  that  a  written 
Aramaic  version  of  the  entire  Old  Testament 
circulated  freely  and  familiarly  in  Palestine  in  the 
days  of  Christ  and  His  Apostles !  Enough,  and 
more  than  enough,  has  surely  been  said  to  refute 
any  such  supposition. 

We  come,  then,  to  a  consideration  of  the  third 
and  only  remaining  view,  that  the  Jews  of  our 
Saviour's  day  were  indebted  for  their  acquaintance 
with  the  Old  Testament  to  the  Septiuigint  translation. 

The  two  former  suppositions  having  been  excluded, 
we  are  logically  compelled  to  rest  in  this  one.  And 
all  the  facts  warrant  our  doing  so.  We  know  that 
the  Greek  version  had  for  long  been  in  existence 
before  the  time  of  Christ.  We  know,  as  has  been 
shown  in  a  preceding  chapter,  that  it  was  very  highly, 
yea,  even  superstitiously,  esteemed  by  the  Jews; 
and  we    Jia^^e  only  to  open  the  Greek  New  Testa- 

*  Deutsch's  Literary  Remains,  p.  324. 


1 86  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION: 


ment,  in  order  to  find  how  often  it  is  quoted  verbatim 
by  the  sacred  writers.  This  is  the  case  even  in 
passages  such  as  Acts  xv.  i6,  17,  Hcb.  i.  6,  etc., 
where  the  meaning  of  the  Greek  is  totally  different 
from  that  of  the  Hebrew,  showing  how  thoroughly 
the  writers  trusted  the  Septuagint  version,  and  how 
dependent  they  were  upon  it  for  their  knowledge 
and  use  of  the  Old  Testament. 

It  is  true  that  there  are  some  comparatively  few 
passages  in  which  the  New  Testament  writers  depart 
from  the  Greek  translation,  and  express  with  greater 
accuracy  the  import  of  the  Hebrew  original  Now, 
what  is  the  inference  to  be  derived  from  this  fact  ? 
Is  it  that  men  like  Peter  and  John  were  acquainted 
with  ancient  Hebrew,  and  so  could  correct  the 
Greek  version  for  themselves  }  This  has  often  been 
asserted  or  implied ;  and  we  find  in  a  recent  learned 
writer  an  affirmation  to  the  eflfcct  that,  **  in  the  times 
of  the  New  Testament,  the  Greek  and  Hebrew 
Bibles  were  current  side  by  side  ;  and  men  like  the 
Apostles,  who  knew  both  languages,  used  either  text 
indifferently."  *  Such  is  quite  the  loose,  popular 
way  of  stating  the  matter,  but  it  will  not  bear  serious 
consideration.  Let  it  be  remembered  that,  as  already 
said,  even  the  learned  historian,  Josephus,  with  all 
his  acknowledged  erudition,   had  only  a  most  im- 

*   The  Old  Test,  in  the  Jew.  Ch.,  p.  J02. 


THE  SEFTUAGINT.  187 

perfect  knowledge  of  Hebrew,  and  then  say  what 
likelihood  there  is  that  humble  fishermen  of  Galilee 
were  familiar  with  that  language.  Let  it  moreover 
be  considered  that,  after  a  most  careful  study  of  St. 
Paul's  writings.  Professor  Jowett  has  reached  the 
conclusion  that  even  they  do  not  "  offer  any  certain 
proof  that  the  Apostle  was  acquainted  with  the 
Hebrew  original."  *  Now,  if  this  be  the  case  with 
respect  to  St.  Paul,  much  less  can  it  be  held  that 
*'  unlearned  and  ignorant  men,"  like  St.  Peter  and 
St.  John — men  certainly  destitute  of  what  was  then 
technically  known  as  "learning"  among  the  Jews, 
were  so  well  acquainted  with  the  Hebrew  of  the  Old 
Testament  as  to  be  able  to  quote  from  it  at  pleasure. 
In  fact.  Dr.  R.  Smith  himself  plainly  appears  to 
contradict,  by  implication,  the  statement  quoted  from 
him  above.  Thus,  at  p.  73,  he  speaks  of  ^^  learned 
Jews  who  read  Hebrew,"  and  the  Apostles  had  cer- 
tainly no  claim  to  be  ranked  among  such  ;  and  again, 
still  more  clearly  at  p.  48,  he  states  that  "  before 
the  time  of  Christ,  people  who  were  not  scholars  had 
ceased  to  understand  Hebrew  altogether."  This 
surely  settles  the  question  as  to  the  use  by  the 
Apostles  of  the  original  Hebrew  text. 

Those    occasional    deviations    from     the     Greek 
version,    observable    in    the    New    Testament,   may 

*  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  i.  401. 


1 88  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 


easily  be  accounted  for  on  other  grounds  than  the 
obviously  untenable  one,  that  the  writers  possessed 
a  knowledge  of  ancient  Hebrew.  In  the  first  place, 
they  may  have  used  a  different  text  of  the  Septuagint 
from  that  now  current.  We  still  wait,  as  has  already 
been  said,  for  a  trustworthy  edition  of  the  Greek 
version  ;  *  and  when  that  has  been  provided,  we  may 
find  that  it  really  is  in  harmony  with  the  quotations 
as  they  stand  in  the  New  Testament. t  In  the 
second  place,  there  is  no  difficulty  in  supposing  that 
"  revised  versions "  of  the  Septuagint,  which  was, 
as  it  were,  the  authorised  version  of  the  Jews,  then 
circulated  in  Palestine.     It  is  certain  that  from  the 

*  It  is  to  be  feared  that  the  insertion  of  the  word  not  in 
Lev.  xi.  6,  is  a  glaring  example  of  intentional  corruption  in  the 
vSeptu  i!^int  text.  ''Ths, "  says  the  late  Dean  Stanley,  ''is  the 
earliest  instance  of  the  falsification  of  Scripcure  to  meet  the  de- 
mands of  science  ;  and  (he  justly  adds)  it  has  been  followed  in 
later  times  by  the  various  efforts  which  have  been  made  to  twist 
the  earlier  chapters  of  Genesis  into  apparent  agreement  with  the 
last  results  of  geology,  representing  da^s  not  to  be  days,  morning 
and  evening  not  to  be  morning  and  evening,  the  deluge  not  to  be 
the  deluge,  and  the  ark  not  to  be  the  ark."  {Sermons  on  Special 
Occasions,  p.  202.)  But  the  point  wliether  "  not  "  ("  cheweth  not 
the  cud")  originally  existed  in  the  text  of  tfee  Septuagint  still 
remains  to  be  determined. 

f  A  remarkable  illustration  is  found  in  Matt.  xxvi.  31.  It  has 
been  argued  that  in  the  quotation  there  made,  the  Evangelist  de- 
parts from  the  Septuagint.  And  so  he  does  from  the  common 
text ;  but  his  words  are  all  but  identical  with  the  text  of  the 
Septuagint  as  it  stands  in  the  Alexandrian  manuscript. 


THE  SEPTUAGINT.  189 

first  there  were  mistakes  in  the  Greek  version,  just 
as  there  are  in  our  common  English  version,  and 
the  Apostles  may  have  availed  themselves  of  well- 
known  corrections  of  these  in  several  of  their  quota- 
tions. In  the  third  place,  where  the  passages  quoted 
agree  perfectly  neither  with  the  Hebrew  nor  the 
Greek,  we  have  only  to  remember  that  the  writers 
were  not  in  the  habit  of  turning  up  chapter  and 
verse  in  making  their  quotations,  but  trusted,  in 
general,  to  memory.  Hence  the  deviations  from 
both  texts  which  may  occasionally  be  observed. 

The  Greek  version,  then,  was  really  the  Bible  of 
our  Lord  and  His  Apostles.  And,  accepting  this 
conclusion,  we  at  once  understand  that  ready  access 
to,  and  familiar  acquaintance  with,  the  contents  of 
the  Old  Testament,  which  are  everywhere  taken  for 
granted  as  possessed  by  the  Jews  of  our  Saviour's 
day.  Few,  indeed,  among  them  could  have  made 
anything  of  the  ancient  Hebrew  text,  had  it  been 
spread  out  before  them.  And  fewer  still,  probably, 
could  have  afford.ed  to  purchase  a  copy  of  the  entire 
Hebrew  Scriptures.  We  have  conclusive  evidence 
as  to  the  heavy  cost  even  of  a  copy  of  the  law  by 
itself;  and  to  acquire  the  whole  Bible  must  have 
taxed  the  resources  of  even  the  wealthiest  in  the 
land.  Greek  books,  on  the  other  hand,  were  cheap 
and  abundant,  so  that  the  poor  man,  as  well  as  the 
rich,  might  easily  possess  his  Bible  in  that  language. 


1 90  OLD    7  ES  TAME  NT  REVISION. 

And  now  let  us  glance  at  some  inferences  which 
necessarily  tollow  from  the  conclusion  which  has 
been  reached. 

First,  we  learn  that  G7'eek  was  the  language  usually 
spoke  ft  by  our  Lord  and  His  Apostles. 

This  is  an  inevitable  corollary  from  what  has  been 
already  established.  If  it  was  the  Greek  Scriptures 
which  Christ  constantly  quoted,  and  to  which  He 
so  frequently  referred  (Matt.  xxi.  42  ;  Mark  xii.  24; 
Luke  xxiv.  32  ;  John  vii.  42,  etc.),  then  Greek  must 
have  been  the  language  which  He  habitually  used  in 
His  addresses  to  the  people.  This,  of  course,  left 
Him  free  occasionally  to  adopt  a  word  from  the 
Hebrew  patois  which  existed  side  by  side  with  the 
Greek,  and  which  was  in  use  for  the  purposes  of 
familiar  intercourse.  The  relation  between  the  two 
languages  was  very  similar  to  that  which  now  holds 
between  English  and  Gaelic  in  many  parts  of  the 
Highlands  of  Scotland.  Greek  was  the  language  of 
literature  and  public  life,  Aramaic  the  language  of 
homely  fellowship  and  domestic  converse.  The 
Jews  were,  in  fact,  bilingual,  and  hence  we  find  a 
few  Aramaic  expressions,  such  as  Raca,  Corhan, 
Mammon,  etc.,  introduced  into  the  discourses  of 
Christ,  while  nothing  could  have  been  more  natural 
than  that  the  gracious  utterance,  "  IMaid,  arise," 
should  have  been  whispered  to  the  damsel  in  the 
familiar  Talitha  cumi  (Mark  v.  41)  of  her  childhood. 


THE  SEPTUAGINT.  191 

Still,  the  assertion  is  constantly  repeated  by  one 
writer  after  another,  that  ^^  Afatiiaic  was  the  language 
which  our  Lord  spoke."  Evidence  to  the  contrary 
seems  totally  disregarded.  But  I  would  once  more 
humbly  request  any  who  have  hitherto  maintained 
that  position  to  look  at  it  in  the  light  of  the  above 
argument.  Let  them  consider  what  was  really  the 
Bible  in  the  hands  of  Christ  and  His  disciples,  and 
then  say  what  was  the  language  v;hich  they  habitually 
employed.  * 

I  am  simply  amazed  at  the  line  of  argument  which 
satisfies  some  able  writers  in  dealing  with  this 
subject.  Thus  says  Dr.  Farrar,  in  reference  to  these 
words  uttered  by  Christ  upon  the  cross, — Eli,  Lit, 
lama  sahachthani ? — "The  fact  that  thus  in  His  last 
moments  Jesus  speaks  in  Aramaic  would  seem  to 
prove  that  this  had  been  the  ordinary  language  of 
His  life."  t     Why  so  }     We  have  exactly  as  much 


*  So  inveterate  is  the  prejudice  against  the  conckxsion  sug- 
gested by  the  above  argument,  that  I  am  not  unprepared  still  to 
be  met  with  the  statement  in  certain  quarters, — "  We  cannot 
believe  that  the  common  people  among  the  Jews  spoke  Greek  of 
any  kind," — and  so  on.  Facts  have  been,  and  may  still  be,  dis- 
regarded, but  they  nevertheless  prove,  as  the  late  Cardinal 
Wiseman  saw  and  acknowledged,  that  "in  the  times  of  Jose  phus, 
even  slaves  were  acquainted  with  the  Greek  language."  {Horce 
Syriacce,  p.  71.  Compare  Josephus,  Antiq.  xiv.  lO,  3,  xviii. 
8,  5  ;   Wars,  v.  7,  4,  etc.) 

\  Life  of  Christ,  so\   ii.,  p.  415. 


192  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

proof  that  the  other  six  cries  of  Christ  upon  the 
cross  were  uttered  in  Greek,  as  that  this  one  was 
expressed  in  Aramaic.  Throughout  his  whole  work 
Dr.  Farrar  never  really  faces  the  question,  notwith- 
standing the  many  occasions  on  which  it  presents 
itself  to  the  critical  scholar. 

The  difficulty  which  Josephus  speaks  of  in  the 
concluding  chapter  of  his  "Antiquities,"  as  having 
beset  him  in  the  composition  of  that  work,  used  to 
be  brought  forward  as  a  proof  that  Greek  could  not 
have  been  commonly  known  among  the  Jews  in  the 
time  of  Christ.  But  this  argument  is  now  abandoned. 
All  admit  that  the  Jews  were  then  bilingual,  knowing 
both  Greek  and  Aramaic,  so  that  the  difficulty 
which  Josephus  felt  consisted  not  in  writing  such 
Hebraic  Greek  as  is  found  in  the  New  Testament, 
but  Greek  which  should  approach  the  style  of  the 
classical  historians. 

The  position  of  Josephus  was  thus  analogous  to 
that  of  Scotch  writers  of  English  in  "the  last  century. 
They  confess  that  they  experienced  the  greatest 
difficulty  in  avoiding  Scotticisms,  and  expressing 
themselves  in  pure  idiomatic  English.  As  Josephus 
styles  the  Greek  "  an  alien  and  outlandish  tongue," 
so  might  they  have  spoken  with  reference  to  the 
language  of  England.  An  apt  illustration  recently 
fell  under  my  notice.  Referring  to  some  advice 
given  him  in  early  days  by  an  aged  and  intelligent 


THE  SEPTUAGINT.  ,  193 

friend,  a  writer  in  one  of  our  magazines  says,  **  He 
cautioned  me  with  entire  gravity,  to  be  punctilious 
in  writing  English  ;  never  to  forget  that  I  was  a 
Scotchman,  that  English  was  a  foreign  tongue,  and 
that  if  I  attempted  the  colloquial.  I  should  certainly 
be  shamed  :  the  remark  was  apposite,  I  suppose, 
in  the  days  of  David  Hume.""^*  Now^  this  exactly 
represents  the  view  for  which  I  plead  as  to  the 
linguistic  condition  of  Palestine  in  the  time  of  Christ. 
Greek  of  a  certain  kind  was  known  and  used 
habitually  by  the  Jews  of  the  period,  just  as  English 
of  a  certain  kind  was  known  and  used  habitually  by 
Scotchmen  in  the  days  of  Hume.  But  as  Scotch 
writers  had  then  to  strive  very  hard,  and  often  with 
imperfect  success,  to  express  themselves  in  correct 
English,  so  was  it  with  Josephus  in  dealing  with  the 
Greek  language. 

Secondly,  we  are  led  by  the  above  argument  to 
a  simple  and  satisfactory  soliitio?i  of  the  great  problem  of 
the  Gospels. 

That  problem  is  how  to  account  both  for  the 
si?7iilarities  and  the  diversities  which  exist  between 
the  first  three  Evangelists.  Every  one  must  have 
noticed  how  strikingly  they  agree  in  the  language 
which    they    use,    and    then    again    how    strangely 


*   Cornh ill  Magazine,  Aug.  1882,  p,  154. 

13 


194 


OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 


they  differ  in  the  expressions  which,  in  the 
midst  of  so  much  verbal  harmony,  are  employed. 
There  thus  emerges  the  puzzling  literary  ques- 
tion, How  are  these  two  sets  of  co-existing  facts 
to  be  accounted  for  ?  and  the  providing  of  a 
satisfactory  answer  to  that  question  has  been  the 
source  of  enormous  difficulty  and  labour  to  Biblical 
critics. 

Some  have  had  recourse  to  the  almost  desperate 
supposition  that  the  Evangelists  copied  from  each 
other.  But  the  utmost  diversity  of  opinion,  or 
rather  conjecture,  has  existed  as  to  who  was  the 
original  writer,  and  who  the  copyists.  Tve  y  one  of 
the  Evangelists  has,  in  turn,  held  the  place  of 
honour,  and  then  again  been  degraded  from  it.  But, 
while  the  theory  that  they  copied  from  each  other 
might,  in  a  rude  and  unsatisfactory  way,  account  for 
the  coincidences  between  them,  it  wholly  fails  to 
explain  the  diversities.  Let  us  take,  for  example, 
the  three  descriptions  which  are  given  of  the  call  of 
Levi  or  Matthew,  and  of  the  events  which  immedi- 
ately followed. 


MATT    ix.  9—17. 

And  as  Jesus  passed 
by  from  thence,  he  saw 
a  man,  called  Matthew, 
sIttiMg  at  the  place  of 
toll :  and  lie  saith  unto 
him,    Follow    me.      And 


MARK  ii.   13 — 22. 

And  he  went  forth  again 
by  the  seaside  ;  and  all 
the  multitude  resorted 
unto  him,  and  he  taught 
them.  And  as  he  passed 
by,  he  saw  Levi,  tl^.e  son 


LUKE  V.  27—39. 

And  after  these  things 
he  went  forth,  and  beheld 
a  publican,  named  Levi, 
sitting  at  the  place  of  toll, 
and  said  unto  him,  Follow 
me.     And  he  forsook  all. 


THE  SEPTUAGINT. 


195 


he  arose,  and  followed 
him.  And  it  came  to 
pass,  as  he  sat  at  meat 
in  the  house,  behold, 
many  publicans  and  sin- 
ners came  and  sat  down 
with  Jesus  and  his  dis- 
ciples. And  when  the 
Pharisees  saw  it,  they 
said  unto  his  disciples, 
Why  eateth  your  Master 
with  the  publicans  and 
sinners?  But  when  he 
heard  it,  he  said,  They 
that  are  whole  have  no 
need  of  a  physician,  but 
they  that  are  sick.  But 
go  ye  and  learn  what  this 
meaneth,  1  desire  mercy, 
and  not  sacrifice :  for  I 
came  not  to  call  the  righ- 
teous, but  sinners.  Then 
come  to  him  the  disciples 
of  John,  saying.  Why  do 
we  and  the  Pharisees  fast 
oft,  but  thy  disciples  fast 
not?  And  Jesus  said  unto 
them.  Can  the  sons  of  the 
bridechamber  mourn,  as 
long  as  the  bridegroom  is 
wiih  them?  but  the  days 
will  come,  when  the  bride- 
groom sh  ill  be  taken 
away  from  them,  and 
then  will  they  fast.  And 
no  man  putteth  a  piece 
of  undressed  cloth  upon 
an  old  garment  ;  for  that 
which  should  fill  it  up 
taketh  from  the  garment, 
and  a  worse  rent  is  made. 
Neither  do  men  put  i.ew 
wine  into  old  wine-skins  : 
else  the  skins  burst,  and 
the  wine  is  spilled,  and 
the  slcins  perish  :  but  they 


of  Alphseus,  sitting  at  the 
place  of  toll :  and  he  saith 
unto  him,  Follow  me. 
And  he  arose,  and  fol- 
lowed him.  And  it  came 
to  pass  that  he  was  sitting 
at  meat  in  his  house,  and 
many  publicans  and  sin- 
ners sat  down  with  Jesus 
and  his  disciples  ;  for 
there  were  rrany,  and 
they  followed  him.  And 
the  sc;ibes  of  the  Phari- 
sees, when  they  saw  that 
he  was  eating  with  the 
sinners  and  publicans, 
said  unto  his  disciples. 
He  eateth  and  drinketh 
with  publicans  and  sin- 
ners. And  when  Jesus 
heard  it,  he  saith  unto 
them,  1'hey  that  are 
whole  have  no  need  of  a 
physician,  but  they  that 
are  sick.  I  came  not  to 
call  the  righteous,  but 
sir  ners.  And  John'^s  dis- 
ciples and  the  Pharisees 
were  fasting:  and  they 
come  and  say  unto  him. 
Why  do  John's  disciples 
and  the  disciples  of  the 
Pharisees  fast,  but  thy 
disciples  fast  not  ?  And 
Jesus  said  unto  them, 
Can  the  sons  of  the  bride- 
chamber  fast  while  the 
bridegroom  is  with  them? 
As  long  as  they  have  the 
bridegroom  with  them 
they  cannot  fast.  But 
the  days  will  come,  when 
the  bridegroom  shall  be 
taken  away  from  them, 
and  then  will  they  fast  in 
that  day.    No  man  seweth 


and  rose  up,  and  fo'lowed 
him.  And  Levi  mide 
him  a  great  feast  in  his 
house :  and  there  was  a 
great  multitude  of  publi- 
cans and  of  others  thit 
were  sitting  at  meat  with 
them.  And  the  Pharisees 
and  their  scribes  mur- 
mured against  his  dis- 
ciples, saying.  Why  do 
ye  eat  and  drink  with  the 
publicans  and  .sinners 
And  Jesus  answering  said 
unto  them.  They  that  are 
whole  have  no  need  of  a 
physician,  but  they  that 
are  sick.  I  am  not  come 
to  call  the  righteous,  but 
sinners  to  r  peiitance. 
And  they  said  unto  him, 
The  disciples  of  John  last 
often,  and  make  supplica- 
tions ;  likewise  also  the 
disciples  of  the  Pharisees  ; 
but  thine  eat  and  drink. 
And  Jesus  said  unto  them, 
Can  ye  make  the  sons 
of  the  bridechamber  fast 
while  the  bridegroom  is 
with  them  ?  But  the  days 
will  come  ;  and  when  the 
bridegroom  shall  be  taken 
away  from  them,  then  will 
they  fast  in  those  days. 
And  he  spake  also  a 
parable  unto  them ;  No 
man  rendeth  a  piece  from 
a  new  garment,  and  put- 
teth it  upon  an  old  gar- 
ment;  else  he  will  rend 
the  new,  and  also  the 
piece  from  the  new  w  II  ' 
not  agree  with  the  old 
And  no  man  putteth  new 
wine  into  old  wine-skins  ; 


196 


OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 


put  new  uine  into  fresh 
uine-skins,  and  both  are 
preserved. 


a  piece  of  undressed  cloth 
on  an  old  garment ;  else 
that  which  should  fill  it 
up  taketh  from  it,  the 
new  from  the  old,  and  a 
worse  rent  is  made.  And 
no  man  putteth  new  wine 
into  old  wine-skins  ;  else 
the  wine  will  burst  the 
skins,  and  the  wine 
perisheth,  and  the  skins  : 
but  they  put  new  wine 
into  fresh  wine-skins. 


else  the  new  wine  will 
burst  the  skins,  and  itsell 
will  be  spilled,  and  the 
skins  will  perish.  But 
new  wine  must  be  put 
into  fresh  wine-skins. 
And  no  man  having 
drunk  old  wine  desireth 
new  ;  for  he  saith  the  old 
is  good.* 


Now,  any  one  glancing  over  these  passages  will  at 
once  perceive  how  strikingly  they  agree,  not  only  in 
substance,  but  in  language.  He  will  also,  however, 
observe  that  they  differ  as  strikingly,  and  that  in  a 
way  which  forbids  the  thought  that  one  writer  copied 
from  the  others.  As  has  been  well  said,  "  The  three 
accounts  are  in  matter  nearly  identical,  and  in  diction 
so  minutely  and  unaccountably  varied,  as  to  declare 
here,  as  elsewhere,  their  independence  of  one  another, 
except  in  having  had  some  common  source  from 
which  they  have  more  or  less  deflected."  t  The 
copying  hypothesis,  then,  as  to  the  origin  of  the  first 
three  Gospels,  must  be  dismissed. 

But  some  other  very  elaborate  schemes  have  been 
devised  to  account  for  the  phenomena  in  question. 
With  these  the  names  of  Bishop  Marsh  in  this 
countiy,  and  of  Eichhorn  in  Germany,  are  specially 

*  Revised  Version,  as  more  exact  than  the  Authorised. 
+  Alford  on  Mark  ii.   13—22. 


THE  SEPTUAGINT.  197 

identified.  They  are  now,  however,  quite  abandoned 
by  scholars,  and  it  would  serve  no  good  purpose  to 
set  them,  with  all  their  intricacies  and  perplexities 
before  the  reader.  Let  us  rather  look,  for  a  little,  a 
the  aspect  which  the  problem  of  the  Gospels  presents 
when  contemplated  in  the  light  of  that  conclusion 
we  have  reached  above. 

One  of  the  most  puzzling  elements  in  it  is  com- 
pletely removed.  As  long  as  it  is  supposed  that 
Christ  spoke  in  Hebrew,  the  identity  which  is  ob- 
served among  the  Evangelists  in  the  reports  which 
they  have  given  of  His  speeches,  must  appear  truly 
marvellous,  if  it  does  not  even  approach  the  miracu- 
lous. They  had,  each  for  himself,  to  translate  from 
Hebrew  into  Greek,  and  yet  they  hit,  in  most  cases, 
upon  the  very  same  expressions.  Surely,  the  fable 
told  with  respect  to  the  authors  of  the  Septuagint  is 
at  last  realized  !  But  can  any  one  imagine  that  these 
independent  translators  from  one  language  into 
another  could  have  attained  to  such  harmony  in  the 
words  which  they  selected  as  is  displayed  by  the 
Evangelists  }  The  idea  is  preposterous,  and  no  sane 
man  will  deem  it  worthy  of  serious  consideration. 

The  aspect  of  the  problem,  however,  is  entirely 
altered  when  we  take  into  account  the  fact  demon- 
strated above,  that  Christ  did  not  speak  in  Hebrew, 
but  in  Greek.  The  impossible  factor  has  now  been 
eliminated  from  it,  and  we  see  our  way  to  a  solution. 


198  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

Christ  spoke  in  the  same  language  in  which  the 
Evangelists  have  reported  His  words.  As  a  matter 
of  course,  therefore,  they  could  not  but  verbally  agree 
in  the  reports  which  they  furnished  of  His  addresses. 
And  it  is  to  be  observed  that  it  is  in  their  statements 
of  what  was  said  that  the  authors  of  the  Gospels 
mostly  agree,  while  they  vary  in  their  descriptions  of 
the  attending  circumstances.  This  is  exactly  what 
happens  on  every  like  occasion.  The  reporters  who 
give  an  account  of  a  public  meeting  will  harmonize, 
word  for  word,  throughout  many  consecutive  sen- 
tences, as  to  the  matter  which  was  spoken,  while  they 
will  inevitably  differ  as  to  the  descriptions  which 
they  give  of  the  scene,  or  of  the  individuals  present.. 
Here,  then,  we  seem  to  have  found  a  sufficiently 
simple  and  satisfactory  explanation  of  those  features, 
alike  of  harmony  and  diversity,  presented  by  the  first 
three  Gospels.  They  agree  so  strikingly,  because 
they  are  faithful  reports  of  what  was  said  ;  they  differ 
so  naturally,  because  they  are  the  productions  of 
three  different  men,  who  wrote  independently  of  one 
another. 

I  am  far  from  maintaining  that  all  difficulties  con- 
nected with  the  origin  of  the  Gospels  are  thus 
removed.  But  I  claim  this  much,  that  the  problem 
has,  at  least,  been  greatly  simplified,  and  brought 
nnich  nearer  a  solution.  In  the  conclusion  reached 
above,  that  Christ  and  His  Apostles  habitually  made 


THE  SEFTUAGINT. 


199 


use  of  the  Greek  language,  we  find  a  basis  for  the 
satisfying  reflection,  that  His  words,  so  far  as 
reported,  are  still  with  us  in  the  form  in  which  they 
were  uttered  :  *  while  we  are  also  furnished  with  the 
means  of  removing  some  of  the  greatest  difiiculties, 
which,  owing  to  a  contrary,  erroneous  belief,  have 
perplexed  the  critical  student  of  the  New  Testament. f 

*  Of  course,  unless  this  be  granted,  almost  all  the  words  which 
Christ  actually  uttered  must  be  regarded  as  having  perished. 
This  supposition  has  sometimes  been  made,  the  basis  of  a  power- 
ful attack  on  the  Gospels.  In  an  able  publication  sent  to  me 
some  years  ago,  a  learned  Jew  is  represented  as  saying  to  some 
clergymen  of  the  Church  of  England,  "I  will  receive  your 
sacrament,  and  subscribe  your  thirty-nine  articles  to-day,  if  you 
■will  repeat  to  me,  as  they  fell  from  his  lips,  three  sentences  of 
the  teaching  of  that  revealing  Emmanuel."  Much  more  follows 
to  the  same  effect ;  and  the  argument  of  the  sceptic  is  conclu- 
sively pushed  home  on  the  hypothesis  that  Christ  did  not  make 
use  of  the  Greek  language,  but  of  the  Hebrew /«/m  of  His  day. 
— Orthodoxy  from  the  Hebrew  Po'mt  of  Vie;v,  p.  l8ff. 

f  See  for  a  fuller  development  of  the  above  argument  "The 
Bible  of  Christ  and  His  Apostles  ''  (Cassell  and  Co.),  and  for 
many  additional  proofs  to  the  same  effect  my  "  Discussions  on 
the  Gospels,"  Part  I.  (Macmillan  and  Co.) 


CHAPTER  X. 

THE   TALMUD  AND   THE    TARGUMS. 

THOSE  English  readers  who  take  an  interest  in 
Biblical  questions  have  doubtless  often  en- 
countered the  expressions  Talmud  and  Targums,  in 
articles  or  books  bearing  upon  the  Old  Testament. 
But  not  improbably  the  terms  referred  to  may  have 
possessed  to  many  only  the  vaguest  significance, 
and  may  have  appeared  as  if  wrapped  in  a  veil  of 
mystery  which  they  had  neither  time  nor  opportunity 
to  penetrate.  Perhaps  this  little  book  may  fall  into 
the  hands  of  some  such  readers.  It  is  indeed 
specially  meant  for  those  who,  without  being  pro- 
fessed scholars  or  theologians,  are  intelligent  stu- 
dents of  the  Bible,  and  wish  to  become  acquainted 
with  all  that  may,  without  the  use  of  erudite  or  tech- 
nical language,  be  told  them  in  connection  with  it. 
The  object  of  this  chapter,  therefore,  will  be  to 
explain,  in  as  simple  a  manner  as  possible,  the 
seemingly  strange  appellations  "  Talmud  "  and  *'  Tar- 
gums,"  and  thus  to  clear  away  that  obscurity  which 


302  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

to   not   a   few   readers  may  hitherto   have  lingered 
round  the  words. 

"What  is  the  Talmud?" 

These  were  the  opening  words  of  a  famous  article 
which  appeared  in  one  of  our  leading  Reviews  some 
fifteen  years  ago.*  The  article  excited  great  in- 
terest in  our  own  and  other  countries,  but  certainly 
did  not  answer  with  anything  like  accuracy  or  fair- 
ness its  own  opening  question.  Written  in  a  style 
of  the  greatest  liveliness  and  vigour,  its  whole  ten- 
dency was  to  mislead.  The  author,  while  carefully 
abstaining  from  any  precision  as  to  the  dates  of  the 
documents  he  quoted,  nevertheless  left  the  impres- 
sion that  these  were  anterior  to  Christianity,  and  that 
the  New  Testament  was,  in  fact,  largely  dependent 
upon  the  Talmud  for  its  phraseology  and  doctrines. 
What  had  been  deemed  the  most  striking  and  original 
of  Christ's  sayings  were  thus  insinuated  to  have  been 
merely  the  echo  of  sentiments  which  really  circulated 
among  the  Jews  before  His  day.  Nowhere,  indeed, 
did  the  learned  writer  of  the  article  definitely  commit 
himself  to  such  an  assertion,  but  that  this  was  the 
drift  of  his  production  soon  appeared  from  the  use 
which  was  made  of  it  by  others.  Knowing  nothing 
of  the  subject  but  what  they  gathered  from  Mr. 
Deutsch's  clever  handling  of  it,  writers  in  some  of 

*  Quarterly  Revie^v^  Oct.,  1867. 


THE   TALMUD  AND   THE    TARGUMS.        203 

the  ablest  of  our  periodicals  were  completely  hood- 
winked by  it,  and  allowed  themselves  to  be  betrayed 
into  the  most  groundless  statements.  Thus  said 
one :  "  As  for  the  old  idea  that  the  Talmud  was  not 
written  before  the  Christian  dispensation,  and  therefore 
contains  plagiarisms  of  the  New  Testament,  that  has 
by  this  time  been  given  up,  along  with  the  notion  that 
all  languages  are  derived  from  Hebrew,  or  that  the 
cuneiform  inscriptions  are  the  work  of  worms."  * 

This,  of  course,  was  the  utterance  simply  of  crass 
ignorance.  How  differently  has  one  who  really 
knows  something  of  the  Talmud,  and  has  done  his 
part  to  make  what  is  best  in  it  known  to  others, 
recently  expressed  himself!  *'To  assert,"  says 
Mr.  Hershon,  *'that  the  New  Testament  owes  many 
of  its  sublime  teachings  to  the  Talmud,  which  was 
not  committed  to  writing  till  four  centuries  after  Christ, 
presumes  rather  too  much  on  the  credulity  even  of 
unbelievers,  and  none  are  more  credulous  than 
they."  t 

What  then  is  the  Talmud  } 

It  is  an  enormous  and  chaotic  repertory  of  Jewish 
thought,  tradition,  and  speculation  on  almost  all 
conceivable  subjects.  The  magnitude  of  the  work 
may  be  inferred  from  the  fact  that,  as  first  printed 

*  Saturday  Review,  Nov.  2,  1867. 

f    Treasures  of  the  Tal7}iud,^.%'^.    By  Paul  J.  Hershon.     1 882. 


204  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

in  1520-23,  and  as  generally  printed  still,  it  con- 
sists of  twelve  immense  folio  volumes  !  The  con 
tents  are  classed  under  two  general  heads — the 
Mishnah  and  the  Gemarah.  The  term  **  Mishnah  " 
means  repedition,  being  based  on  the  Pentateuch, 
and  repeating,  as  it  were,  while  enlarging  the  original 
text.*  The  term  **  Gemarah,"  again,  denotes  com- 
pletion,  being  a  sort  of  commentary  on  the  Mishnah, 
which  it  develops  and  explains  at  vast  length,  thus 
completing,  as  was  supposed,  the  Mosaic  legislation. 
All  this  taken  together  constitutes  the  "  Talmud," 
which  is  a  word  that  means  study  or  learning,  and 
this  was  the  oral  or  unwritten  law  of  the  Jews,  as 
distinguished  from  the  Pentateuch,  the  written  law, 
which  was  always  regarded,  in  theory  at  least,  as  the 
supreme  and  unchangeable  authority. 

The  Mishnah  was  begun  to  be  written  down  by 
the  celebrated  Rabbi  Judah  about  the  middle  of  the 
second  century  after  Christ,  and  was  completed  by 
his  disciples  some  time  about  the  close  of  the  cen- 
tury. It  is  by  far  the  most  valuable  of  the  rabbinical 
writings,  and  doubtless  preserves  traditions  that  had 
been  orally  handed  down  from  a  remote  antiquity. 
The  Gemarah  was  gradually  added  on  to  this  in  the 

*  Such  is  the  common  explanation,  but  Deutsch  maintains 
(ZzV.  Rem.,  p.  332)  that  Mishnah  means  "learning,"  and  is 
synonymous  with  Talmud  and  Torah.  This  does  not  appear 
probable. 


THE  TALMUD  AND   THE   TARGUMS.        205 

course  of  the  next  three  hundred  years.*  Many 
rabbis  took  part  in  the  work,  and  by  inserting  in  it, 
very  much  at  random  as  would  appear,  all  sorts 
of  laws,  customs,  explanations,  and  illustrations, 
gradually  built  up  the  enormous  structure  which  is 
known  as  the  Talmud  at  the  present  day.  Its 
multifarious  contents  have  been  divided  into  what 
are  called  "Halachah"  and  "  Haggadah,"  the  first 
of  these  words  meaning  rule,  and  referring  to  exposi- 
tions and  enlargements  of  the  Pentateuchal  laws, 
while  the  second  denotes  legend,  and  includes  alle 
gories,  parables,  and  narratives  of  the  most  varied 
character.f  The  legal  and  the  legendary  elements 
thus  join  together  to  form  that  stupendous  pile  of 
literary  matter  which  has  so  long  and  perniciously 
stood  between  the  Jews  and  the  pure  Word  of  God, 
and  which,  in  spite  of  the  sufferings  which  adherence 
to  it  has  frequently  caused  them,  most  of  the  de- 
scendants of  Abraham  still  regard  with  superstitious 
reverence. 

As   has   recently  been  well    remarked,   "Implicit 

*  The  Talmudic  period  may  be  said  to  extend  from  about  200 
A.D.  to  600  A,D.  The  Jerusalem  Talmud  was  formed  about  300 
A.D.,  and  the  Babylonian  Talmud,  which  is  to  be  understood  as 
referred  to  when  the  Talmud  is  mentioned,  was  not  completed 
before  600  A.D. 

f  Under  Baggadah  chiefly  may  be  classed  Midrash — any 
popular  exposition  of  the  sacred  books  with  a  view  to  edification. 
This  is  often  mixed  up  with  translation.     Deutsch  happily  refers 


2o6  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION: 

adherence  to  the  teaching  of  the  Talmud  has  often 
drawn,  like  a  lightning  conductor,  the  electricity  of 
persecution  upon  the  hapless  and  hopeless  Jews,  and 
doubtless  does  so  still.  Let  them  but  cast  their  idol, 
the  Talmud,  *  to  the  moles  and  to  the  bats,'  and  they 
will  fare  like  other  men ;  they  will  enjoy  liberty,  and 
be  free  from  persecution.  Take  the  case  of  the 
Karaite  *  Jews,  for  example,  in  bigoted  Russia. 
They  command  more  respect  there,  and  enjoy 
greater  personal  freedom  and  social  privileges  than 
their  so-called  orthodox  brethren.  The  former,  not 
being  influenced  by  the  Talmud,  make  far  better 
citizens,  and  the  Russian  Government  is  not  so 
blind  as  not  to  observe  the  marked  difference  be- 
tween the  one  and  the  other,  nor  so  unjust  as  not 
to  signify  its  preference  in  a  special  manner."  t 

While  it  is  certainly  true,  as  the  writer  just  quoted 
observes,  that  "the  special  pleading  of  Deutsch  in 
his  writings  cunningly  drapes  all  that  is  bad  in  the 
book,  and  hides  its  ungainly  parts,"  we  may,  in  so 
far,  also  agree  with  him  when  he  says  that  "the 
Talmud  has  its  attractions,  and  they  are  neither  few 

to  Bunyan's  "  Pilgrim's  Progress,"  as  a  sort  of  Haggadah  in  our 
own  language.     {Lit.  Kem.,  p.  47.) 

*  Those  Jews  who  hold  by  the  ivritten  law,  and  seek  to  ex- 
pound it,  not  according  to  tradition,  but  by  fair  grammatical 
interpretation.     (Comp.  above,  p.  154.) 

t  Treasures  of  the  Talmud,  p.  xii. 


THE,  TALMUD  AND    THE   TARGUMS.        207 

nor  small,  but  its  moral  poverty  sadly  detracts  from 
its  charms,  and,  in  fact,  serves  to  make  it  unsightly."* 
I  shall  now  set  before  the  reader  some  specimens  of 
what  are  called  *'  The  Treasures  of  the  Talmud,"  and 
shall  leave  him  to  infer  of  what  nature  those  vastly 
larger  portions  of  it  must  be  which  cannot  be  em- 
braced under  such  a  designation. t 


*  Ibid.,  p.  xi. 

f  Here  the  term  Cabala  or  Kabala  may  be  noticed.  The 
word  properly  denotes  "tradition,"  and  refers  to  that  spurious 
science  among  the  Jews  which  professes  to  bring  out  the  secret 
meaning  of  Scriptui-e.  Every  letter,  word,  and  accent  of  the 
Law  is  supposed  to  have  a  mystic  sense,  and  by  studying  that 
the  Cabalists  pretended  even  to  be  able  to  predict  future  events. 
Longfellow,  in  "The  Golden  Legend,"  has  well  set  forth  the  ex- 
aggerated importance  which  the  Jews  attached  to  their  various 
"traditions"  as  compared  with  Scripture,  when  he  makes  a 
rabbi  express  himself  as  follows : — 

"  I  am  the  Rabbi  Ben  Israel, 

Throughout  this  village  known  full  well, 
And,  as  my  scholars  all  will  tell. 

Learned  in  things  divine  ; 
The  Kabala  and  Talmud  hoar 
Than  all  the  prophets  prize  I  more  ; 
For  water  is  all  Bible  lore. 

But  Mishna  is  strong  wine." 

There  is,  of  course,  an  anachronism  in  ascribing  such  sentiments 
to  a  contemporary  of  Christ.  But  at  the  present  day  ' '  only  he 
is  an  orthodox  Jew,  who  recognizes  the  Talmudic  interpretation 
of  Holy  Writ  as  that  handed  down  from  Moses. "  (^Contemporary 
Review,  ^Q.^\..,  1882,  p.  372.)  Let  the  reader  consider  this  claim 
in  the  light  of  some  of  the  interpretations  afterwards  brought 
forward. 


208  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION, 

"Whence,"   it   is   asked,  "do   we   ascertain  that 
God's  anger  lasts  only  for  a  moment  ?     (Ps.  xxx.  5,) 

*  His  anger  endureth  but  a  moment :  in  His  favour 
is  life.'  If  thou  wilt,  I  would  prove  it  from  this 
(Isa.  xxvi.  20),  *  Hide  thyself,  as  it  were,  for  a  little 
moment,  until  the  indignation  be  overpast.'  At 
what  time  of  the  day  is  God   angry  .^     Abaii  says, 

*  During  the  first  three  hours  of  the  day,  when  the 
cock's  comb  turns  white.'  But  the  cock's  comb 
turns  white  at  all  the  other  hours  of  the  day.  Well, 
but  then  there  are  still  some  streaks  of  red  left  on 
the  comb,  which  is  not  the  case  when  God  is  angry, 
for  then  it  is  quite  white.  Rabbi  Yehoshua  ben 
Levi  used  to  suffer  much  from  a  certain  Min  {i.e.,  a 
heretic,  or  a  Christian).  One  day  he  got  a  cock, 
and  placed  it  at  the  foot  of  his  bed,  in  order  to  find 
out  the  time  when  God  was  angry,  intending  at  the 
nick  of  time  to  curse  the  Min.  But  when  the  time 
came,  the  rabbi  fell  asleep.  On  waking  and  noticing 
that  the  opportunity  was  gone,  he  remarked  (Ps. 
cxlv.  9),  *  His  tender  mercies  are  over  all  His 
works,'  and  it  is  also  written  (Prov.  xvii.  26), 
'Also  to  punish  the  just  is  not  good,  therefore  it 
is  not  right  for  me  so  to  do.' "  We  learn  in  the 
name  of  Rabbi  Meir,  "  When  the  kings  (of  the 
nations)  put  their  crowns  upon  their  heads  and 
worship  the  sun,  God  instantly  becomes  angry.* 
{Avodah  Zarah,  folio  4  B.) 


THE   TALMUD  AND   THE   TARGUMS.        209 

The  translator  naively  appends  as  a  note,  "This 
tell-tale  faculty  of  the  cock's  comb,  which  is  corro- 
borated in  Sanhedrin  (fol.  105  b),  has  not  been 
noticed  by  naturalists  of  the  present  day."  * 

The  following  is  an  example  of  that  absurd  quib- 
bling which  is  so  characteristic  of  the  Talmud  in 
dealing  with  Scripture  : — 

"  He  who  gives  of  his  seed  to  Molech  is  not 
guilty,  unless  he  has  both  given  over  his  child  to 
Molech,  and  also  caused  it  to  pass  through  the  fire. 
If  he  has  given  it  over  to  Molech,  and  has  not  caused 
it  to  pass  through  the  fire,  or  if  he  has  caused  it  to 
pass  through  the  fire,  but  has  not  given  it  over  to 
Molech,  he  is  not  guilty.  ...  If  one  has  caused  all 
his  children  to  pass  through  the  fire,  he  is  not  guilty ; 
for  it  is  said  (Lev.  xviii.  21),  *  Any  of  thy  seed,'  and 
it  is  not  said,  *  all  thy  seed.'  "  t 

A  few  samples  may  be  added  of  the  rabbinical 
style  of  interpretation  : — 

*'  The  Holy  One — blessed  be  He  ! — will  in  the 
future  bring  together  Mount  Sinai  and  Tabor  and 
Carmel,  and  place  Jerusalem  on  the  top  of  them; 
for  it  is  said  (Isa.  ii.  2),  'The  mountain  of  the 
Lord's  house  shall  be  established  on  the  top  of  the 
mountains.'"     {Midrash  Tillim,  fol.  39  A.) 

"Jerusalem   will   in   the   future   be   extended    in 

*  Treasures  of  the  Talmud,  p.  156.  f  /<^'^.,  p.  I79. 

14 


210  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

ever}-  direction,  till  it  reaches  the  gate  of  Damascus, 
where  the  returned  exiles  shall  come  and  rest,  that 
it  might  be  fulfilled  which  is  said  (Zech.  ix.  i), 
*  Damascus  shall  be  the  rest.' "  i^Shir  Hashirim 
Rabba,  fol.  274  A.) 

"It  is  written  (Isa.  Ixvi.  23),  'It  shall  come  to  pass 
from  one  new  moon  to  another,'  etc.  But  how 
is  it  possible  that  all  flesh  shall  come  upon  every 
new  moon  and  every  Sabbath  to  Jerusalem  ?  Rabbi 
Levi  said,  'In  the  future,  Jerusalem  will  be  as  the 
land  of  Israel,  and  the  land  of  Israel  shall  be  as  the 
whole  world.'  But  how  will  they  come  from  the 
ends  of  the  world  every  new  moon  and  every  Sabbath  ? 
The  clouds  will  come  and  convey  them  to  Jerusalem, 
where  they  will  repeat  their  morning  prayer,  and 
this  it  is  for  which  the  prophet  praises  them  (Isa.  Ix. 
8),  'Who  are  these  that  fly  as  a  cloud.?'"  etc. 
{Valkut  Shimoni,  fol.  57  b.)* 

We  meet  with  the  following  amazing  statements : — 

"  Nero  embraced  Judaism,  and  Rabbi  Meir  was 
one  of  his  descendants."     {Gittin,  fol.  55.) 

"As  a  reward  for  the  forty-two  sacrifices  which 
Balak  the  king  of  Moab  off'ered,  he  was  accounted 
worthy  to  become  the  ancestor  of  Ruth,  of  whom 
came  Solomon,  who  wrote  (i  Kings  iii.  4),  "A 
thousand  burnt  offerings  did  Solomon  offer."     {Soieh^ 

fol.  47  A.) 

*  lOi'd.s  D.  2oq. 


THE   TALMUD  AND   THE    TARGUMS.        211 

Of  Titus,  when  at  sea,  we  are  told,  **  Then  came  a 
Bath  Kol,  a  voice  from  heaven,  and  said,  *  O  thou 
wicked  man,  son  of  a  wicked  man,  and  descendant 
of  Esau  the  wicked,  go  ashore.  I  have  a  creature 
insignificant  in  my  world  ;  go  thou  and  fight  with 
that.'  (This  creature  was  a  gnat,  and  was  termed 
insignificant,  because  it  has  a  mouth  to  take  in  food, 
but  has  no  outlet  to  discharge  it.)  Immediately  he 
landed,  a  gnat  flew  into  his  nostrils,  and  made  i+s 
way  to  his  brain,  upon  which  it  fed  for  a  period  ^f 
seven  years.  Once  he  happened  to  pass  a  black- 
smith's forge,  and  the  noise  of  the  hammer  caused 
the  gnat  to  cease  working  on  his  brain.  *Aha!' 
said  Titus,  *  here's  a  remedy.'  He  ordered  a  black- 
smith continually  to  hammer  before  him,  paying  him 
four  zouzim  a  day  if  a  Gentile  blacksmith,  but  paying 
nothing  to  a  Jewish  one ;  for  said  he  to  the  latter, 

*  Thou  art  well  paid  by  seeing  me,  thy  enemy,  in  such 
a  painful  condition.'  For  thirty  days  he  felt  relief, 
but  after  that  period  all  the  hammering  was  in  vain. 
Rabbi  Phinehas,  the  son  of  Aruba,  testified,  saying, 

*  I  myself  was  among  the  magnates  of  Rome  when 
an  inquest  was  made  upon  Titus,  and  upon  opening 
his  brain  they  found  in  it  the  gnat,  as  big  as  a 
swallow,  weighing  two  selas.  Others  say  it  was  as 
large  as  a  pigeon  a  year  old,  weighing  two  litres. 
Abaii  said,  *  We  found  its  mouth  to  be  of  copper,  and 
its  claws  of  iron.'     Titus  willed  that  after  his  death 


212  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

his  body  should  undergo  cremation,  and  his  ashes 
should  be  scattered  over  the  surface  of  the  seven  seas, 
that  the  God  of  the  Jews  might  not  find  him,  and 
bring  him  to  judgment."  *     {Gittin,  fol.  56  b.) 

The  following  are  one  or  two  specimens  of  the 
grotesque  conceptions  and  ludicrous  exaggerations 
of  the  rabbis : — 

"  Rabbah  bar  bar  Channah  said,  *  I  myself  saw  a 
frog  which  was  as  large  as  the  village  of  Acra  in 
Hagronia.  How  large  was  Acra  in  Hagronia  ?  It 
consisted  of  sixty  houses.  A  serpent  came  and 
swallowed  the  frog,  and  a  female  raven  swallowed 
the  serpent,  and  then  flew  off,  and  perched  on  a 
tree.  Come,  see  how  strong  this  tree  must  have 
been.'  Rav  Pappa  bar  Shemuel  said,  *  I  should 
never  have  believed  it  had  I  not  been  present 
myself.' "  {Bava  Bathra,  fol.  73  B.) 

"  Rabbah  bar  bar  Channah  said,  *  We  were  once 
on  board  ship,  and  we  saw  a  certain  fish,  upon  whose 
nostrils  a  creature  fastened  itself,  and  killed  him. 
The  dead  fish  was  washed  ashore  by  the  waves  of 
the  sea,  and  sixty  villages  were  swamped  in  conse- 
quence. Sixty  other  towns  fed  upon  the  carcase, 
and  sixty  towns  besides  them  salted  what  was  left 
over.  From  one  eye-ball  only  they  filled  three 
hundred  barrels  of  oil.     When  we  visited  the  same 

*  Ibid.,  p.  260. 


THE   TALMUD  AND   THE.  TARGUMS.        213 

place  a  year  afterwards,  we  found  that  they  had  cut 
up  the  bones  of  the  fish  for  the  rebuilding  of  the 
demolished  cities.'  "     {Ibid.) 

"  Rabbi  Yohanan  related,  *  Once  we  were  sailing 
in  a  ship,  when  we  descried  a  fish  which  lifted  up 
its  head  out  of  the  sea.  His  eyes  were  like  two 
moons,  and  the  water  was  spouted  from  his  nostrils 
like  two  rivers  of  Sura.'  Rav  Saphra  related,  *  We 
were  once  on  shipboard,  and  saw  a  fish  which  put 
his  head  up  out  of  the  sea ;  he  had  horns,  and  upon 
them  was  written,  *'  I  am  the  meanest  creature  of 
the  sea,  and  I  am  three  hundred  miles  in  length, 
and  am  now  bound  for  the  mouth  of  the  leviathan 
for  his  meal  to-day." '  Rav  Ashi  said  this  was  the 
sea-goat,  which  diggeth  in  the  bottom  of  the  sea 
with  its  horns  in  search  of  food."*  {Ibid.,  fol.  74A.) 

The  reader  will  now  feel  that  enough,  and  perhaps 
more  than  enough,  of  this  trash  has  been  set  before 
him.  The  apology  which  some  present  for  it  is  that 
such  stories  (with  others  of  a  kind  which  cannot  be 
quoted)  are  cryptographs^  meaning  that  they  are  not 
to  be  literally  understood,  but  must  be  mystically 
interpreted.  If  so,  some  of  the  "  initiated  "  ought 
surely  to  come  forward  and  do  the  necessary  work. 
Such  attempts  as  are  made  in  the  Talmud  itself  to 
attach   an   allegorical   significance  to   some   of    its 

*  Ibid.,  p.  305  fif 


214  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

narratives  do  not  strike  one  as  very  successful. 
And  even  after  making  every  allowance  for  the 
exuberance  of  Eastern  fancy  and  the  severity  of 
Western  taste  and  judgment,  it  seems  impossible 
to  avoid  the  conclusion  that  in  the  Babylonian 
Talmud  of  the  Jewish  rabbis  there  is  presented 
to  us  the  most  stupendous  mass  of  childishness 
and  folly  that  was  ever  collected.  Of  course,  in  a 
work  of  such  vast  dimensions,  all  cannot  be  bad. 
There  are  some  very  wise  maxims,  and  some  really 
beautiful  legends  ;  and  that  this  aspect  of  the  work 
may  also  be  presented,  I  '\\  '11  now  set  a  few  favour- 
able specimens  of  these  before  the  reader.* 

"The  place  honours  not  the  man,  'tis  the  man 
who  gives  honour  to  the  place." 

"  If  a  word  spoken  in  its  time  is  worth  one  piece 
of  money,  silence  in  its  time  is  worth  two." 

"When  wine  enters  the  head,  the  secret  flies  out." 
"  The   camel    desired  horns,    and   his   ears   were 
taken  from  him." 

"  Silence  is  the  fence  round  wisdom." 
"  Rather  be  the  tail  among  lions  than  the  head 
among  foxes." 

"  Truth  is  heavy,  therefore  few  care  to  carry  it." 
"  Descend  a  step  in  choosing  thy  wife  :  ascend  a 
step  in  choosing  thy  friend." 

*  I  am  indebted  for  what  immediately  follows  to  H.  Polano's 
Selections  from  the  Talmud,  p.  307  ff. 


THE   TALMUD  AND  THE   TARGUMS.        215 

"■  Commit  a  sin  twice,  and  it  will  not  seem  to  thee 
a  crime." 

"■  Despise  no  man,  and  deem  nothing  impossi- 
ble :  every  man  hath  his  hour,  and  every  thing  its 
place." 

**  The  best  preacher  is  the  heart :  the  best  teacher 
is  time :  the  best  book  is  the  world  :  the  best  friend 
is  God." 

*'  There  is  a  great  difference  between  one  who  can 
feel  ashamed  before  his  own  soul,  and  one  who  is 
only  ashamed  before  his  fellow-men." 

The  Bride  and  Bridegroom. 

"  There  was  once  a  man  who  pledged  his  dearest 
faith  to  a  maiden,  beautiful  and  true.  For  a  time  all 
passed  pleasantly,  and  the  maiden  lived  in  happiness. 
But  then  the  man  was  called  from  her  side,  and  left 
her ;  long  she  waited,  but  he  did  not  return.  Friends 
pitied  her,  and  rivals  mocked  her;  tauntingly  they 
pointed  at  her,  and  said,  *  He  has  left  thee ;  he  will 
never  come  back.'  The  maiden  sought  her  chamber 
and  read  in  secret  the  letters  in  which  he  promised 
to  be  ever  faithful,  ever  true.  Weeping  she  read 
them,  but  they  brought  comfort  to  her  heart:  she 
dried  her  eyes,  and  doubted  not. 

"  A  joyous  day  dawned  for  her  :  the  man  she  loved 
returned ;  and  when  he  learned  that  "others  had 
doubted,  and  asked  her  how  she  had  preserved  her 


2i6  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

faith,  she  showed  his  letters  to  him,  declaring  her 
eternal  trust. 

*'  Israel,  in  misery  and  captivity,  was  mocked  by 
the  nations :  her  hopes  of  redemption  were  made 
a  laughing-stock;  her  sages  were  scoffed  at,  her 
holy  men  derided.  Into  her  synagogues,  into  her 
schools,  went  Israel ;  she  read  the  letters  which  her 
God  had  written,  and  believed  in  the  holy  promises 
which  they  contained.  God  will  in  time  redeem  her ; 
and  when  He  says,  '  How  could  you  alone  be  faith- 
ful of  all  the  mocking  nations  ? '  she  will  point  to 
the  law,  and  answer,  '  Had  not  Thy  law  been  my 
delight,  I  should  long  since  have  perished  in  my 
affliction'  (Ps.  cxix,  92)." 

Truth, 

"  When  God  was  about  to  create  man,  the  angels 
gathered  round  Him.  Some  of  them,  opening  their 
lips,  exclaimed,  *  Create,  O  God,  a  being  who  shall 
praise  Thee  from  earth,  even  as  we  in  heaven  sing 
Thy  glory.'  But  others  said,  *  Hear  us.  Almighty 
King  ;  create  no  more  !  The  glorious  harmony  of  the 
heavens,  which  Thou  hast  sent  to  earth,  will  be  by  man 
disturbed,  destroyed.'  Then  silence  fell  upon  the 
contesting  hosts,  as  the  Angel  of  JNIercy  appeared 
before  the  throne  of  grace  on  bended  knees.  Sweet 
was  the  voice  which  said  entreatingly,  *  O  Father, 
Create  Thou  man ;  make  him  Thine  own  noble  image- 


THE   TALMUD  AND    THE    TARGUMS.        217 

With  heavenly  pity  will  I  fill  his  heart,  with  sympathy 
towards  every  living  thing  impress  his  being  :  through 
him  will  they  find  cause  to  praise  Thee.'  Then  the 
Angel  of  Mercy  ceased,  and  the  Angel  of  Peace, 
with  tearful  eyes,  spoke  thus  :  *  O  God,  create  him 
not !  Thy  peace  he  will  disturb ;  the  flow  of 
blood  will  follow  sure  his  coming.  Confusion, 
horror,  war,  will  blot  the  earth,  and  Thou  wilt  no 
longer  find  a  pleasant  place  among  Thy  works  on 
earth.'  Then  spoke  in  stern  tones  the  Angel  of 
Justice  :  *  And  Thou  wilt  judge  him,  God  :  he  shall 
be  subject  to  my  sway.'  The  Angel  of  Truth  ap- 
proached, saying,  *  Cease !  O  God  of  truth,  with 
man  Thou  sendest  falsehood  to  the  earth.'  Then 
all  were  silent,  and  out  of  the  deep  quietness  the 
divine  words  came,  *Thou,  O  Truth,  shalt  go  to 
earth  with  him,  and  yet  remain  a  denizen  of  heaven 
— betwixt  heaven  and  earth  to  float,  a  connecting  link 
between  the  two/  " 

What,  we  have  next  to  enquire,  are  the  Jewish 
Targums  } 

This  point  need  not  detain  us  long.  The  word 
"Targum"  simply  denotes  translation,  and  the 
Jewish  Targums  accordingly  are  those  versions  of 
the  Old  Testament  which,  at  varying  dates,  were 
made  into  the  Syro-Chaldaic  or  Aramaic  language. 

As  shown  in  the  preceding  chapter,  written  trans- 


2i8  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

lations  of  the  Scriptures  into  Aramaic  were  for  a 
long  time  strictly  forbidden  among  the  Jews.  But 
Hebrew  having  after  the  return  from  the  captivity 
become  a  dead  language,  interpreters  {Meturgemanini) 
were  employed  in  the  synagogues  orally  to  translate 
the  original  into  the  common  Aramaic,  until,  as 
would  appear,  the  general  acquaintance  with  Greek 
which  was  acquired  by  the  people  led  to  the  aboli- 
tion of  the  office.^*  And  even  while  these  "  inter- 
preters "  were  needed  and  permitted,  they  were  far 
from  being  much  respected  or  encouraged.  The 
following  is  the  account  which  Deutsch  gives  of 
them : — "  Persons  unfit  to  be  readers,  as  those  whose 
clothes  were  so  torn  and  ragged  that  their  limbs 
became  visible  through  the  rents,  their  appearance 
thus  not  corresponding  to  the  reverence  due  to  the 
sacred  word  itself,  or  blind  men  were  admitted  to 
the  office  of  a  meturgeman  ;  and,  apart  from  there 
being  not  the  slightest  authority  attached  to  their 
interpretations,  they  were  liable  to  be  stopped  and 
silenced,  publicly  and  ignominiously,  whenever  they 
seemed  to  overstep  the  bounds  of  discretion.  .  .  . 
Altogether,  they  appear  to  have  borne  the  character 
of    empty-headed,    bombastic   fools."  f     Even   had 

*  It  is  well  worthy  of  notice  that  no  reference  whatever  to 
such  interpreters  occurs  in  the  New  Testament,  notwithstanding 
the  mention  which  is  made  of  the  synagogue  worship. 

■j-  Lit.  Rem.,  p.  326. 


THE   TALMUD  AND    THE   TARGUMS.        219 

men  of  this  character  and  standing  ventured  against 
express  prohibition  to  form  any  written  translations 
of  Scripture,  it  is  plain  that  these  would  never  have 
become  popular,  or  been  allowed  the  least  authority. 
But,  as  might  in  the  circumstances  have  been  ex- 
pected, they  made  no  such  attempt.  We  hear  of  no 
Targum  in  written  form  before  the  days  of  Christ. 

Those  Targums  which  still  exist  are  all  of  very 
uncertain  date  and  authorship.  This  much  only  is 
certain  regarding  them,  that  the  most  ancient  of 
them  was  not  committed  to  writing  till  about  the 
second  century  after  Christ. 

The  oldest  Targum  extant  bears  the  name  of 
Onkelos.  Who  he  was,  or,  indeed,  whether  a  person 
of  that  name  ever  existed,  is  matter  of  speculation  and 
dispute.  Some  recent  writers  have  been  disposed 
to  identify  him  with  Aquila,  whose  Greek  version 
of  the  Old  Testament  will  be  hereafter  described. 
His  work  consists  of  a  very  free,  but,  of  its  kind, 
excellent  translation  of  the  Pentateuch.  For  various 
reasons  he  often  departs  from  the  exact  meaning  of 
the  original.  Thus,  as  is  well  known,  one  of  the 
commonest  Hebrew  words  for  God,  "  Elohim,"  is  in 
reality  a  plural  form.  Christian  divines  have  fre- 
quently seen  in  this,  if  not  a  proof,  yet  a  support,  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  But  it  seems  to  have 
made  quite  a  different  impression  on  the  mind  of 
Onkelos.     To  him  it  appeared  liable  to   suggest  a 


220  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

multiplicity  of  deities,  and  therefore  he  substitutes 
Jehovah  for  it.  He  also  changes  anthropomorphic 
expressions  which  are  applied  to  God,  and  any  other 
forms  of  words  which' seemed  lowering  to  the  Divine 
majesty.  Thus,  in  Gen.  xi.  5,  instead  of  "And 
Jehovah  came  down  to  see  the  city,"  the  Targum  has 
**  And  Jehovah  revealed  Himself;  "  while  in  Exod.  xv. 
II,  instead  of  "Who  is  like  unto  Thee,  O  Jehovah, 
among  the  gods  }  "  the  rendering  given  is,  "  There 
is  none  like  unto  Thee,  Thou  art  God."  For  these 
and  various  other  reasons,  this  Chaldee  Targum  of 
Onkelos  often  departs  from  the  strict  meaning  of  the 
original  Hebrew. 

This  is  far  more  the  case  with  the  Targum  of 
Jonathan  ben  Uzziel  on  the  Prophets,  which  comes 
next  in  age  and  value  to  that  of  Onkelos.  It  can 
hardly  be  deemed  a  translation  at  all.  With  greater 
propriety  it  might  be  called  a  paraphrase,  with  room 
made  for  much  foreign  matter,  parables,  allegories, 
and  such-like,  having  no  place  in  the  Hebrew  text. 
It  embraces  the  following  books — Joshua,  Judges, 
Samuel,  Kings,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  the 
twelve  minor  prophets.  It  is,  of  course,  written  in 
Chaldee,  and  may  most  probably  be  assigned  to  the 
first  half  of  the  third  century  after  Christ.  Like  the 
work  of  Onkelos,  it  issued  from  the  learned  Jewish 
academies  which  then  flourished  at  Babylon. 

The  seare  by  far  the  oldest  of  existing  Targums  of 


THE   TALMUD  AND   THE   TARGUMS.        221 

the  Old  Testament.  Several  others  belonging  to  a 
later  date  might  be  mentioned,  but  hardly  call  for 
notice  in  this  place.*  It  may  simply  be  stated  that 
those  fragments  of  the  Targum  of  Job  still  in  exist- 
ence may  possibly  embody  some  portion  of  what 
was  perhaps  the  very  first  of  all  the  Targums. 

According  to  the  Talmud,  Job  had  no  real  exist- 
ence. Its  language  respecting  him  is,  "  Job  never 
was,  and  never  was  created,"  having  simply  been 
summoned  into  existence  by  an  inspired  poet,  for 
the  purpose  of  weaving  round  his  name  the  most 
interesting  and  important  instructions.  From  the 
same  source  we  learn,  as  was  formerly  noticed,  that 
an  unauthorised  Targum  of  the  Book  of  Job  was 
formed  at  a  very  early  period  of  our  era. 

To  give  the  English  reader  some  idea  of  the 
character  of  these  Jewish  translations,  or  rather 
paraphrases,  of  the  Old  Testament,  a  verse  from 
our  Authorised  Version  is  subjoined  side  by  side 
with  the  corresponding  passage  in  the  Targum  of 
Jonathan.! 

I  Samuel  xvii.  8. 

Authorised  Version,  Targum  of  Jonathan. 

And  he  stood  and  cried  And  he  arose,  and  he  cried  unto  the  armies  of 

unto  the  armies  of  Israel,         Israel,  and  said  unto  them,  Why  have  you  put 

*  See  for  a  full  and  excellent  account  of  the  Targums  Smith's 
Diet,  of  Bible,  iii.,  pp.  1637 — 1665,  or  the  same  as  reprinted  in 
Deutsch's  Literary  Reinains^  pp.  319 — 403, 

t  Deutsch's  Lit.  Rem.,  p.  378. 


222 


OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 


and  said  unto  them,  Why 
are  ye  come  out  to  set 
your  battle  in  array  ?  Am 
not  I  a  PhiUstine,  and  ye 
servants  to  Saul  ?  Choose 
you  a  man  for  you,  and 
et  him  come  down  to  me. 


yourselves  in  battle  array?  Am  I  not  the  Phi- 
listine, and  you  the  servants  of  Saul  ?  [I  am 
Goliath  the  Philistine  from  Gath,  who  have 
killed  the  two  sons  of  Eli,  the  priests  Hophna 
and  Phinehas,  and  carried  captive  the  ark  of 
the  covenant  of  the  Lord,  I  who  have  carried  it 
to  the  house  of  Dagon,  my  Error,  and  it  has 
been  there  in  the  cities  of  the  Philistines  seven 
months.  And  in  every  battle  which  the  Phi- 
listines have  had,  I  went  at  the  head  of  the 
army,  and  we  conquered  in  the  battle,  and  we 
strewed  the  killed  like  the  dust  of  the  earth, 
and  until  now  have  the  Philistines  not  thought 
me  wor.thy  to  become  captain  of  a  thousand 
over  them.  And  you,  O  children  of  Israel, 
what  mighty  deed  has  Saul  the  son  of  Kish 
from  Gibeah  done  for  you,  that  you  made  him 
king  over  you  ?  If  he  is  a  valiant  man,  let  him 
come  out  and  do  battle  with  me  ;  but  if  he  is  a 
weak  man],  then  choose  for  yourselves  a  man, 
and  let  him  come  out  against  me. 


CHAPTER   XI. 

VERSIONS  OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT  LATER 
THAN  THE    TIME   OF  CHRIST. 

IT  is  a  singular  fact  that  no  less  than  three  addi- 
tional versions  of  the  Old  Testament  into  Greek 
were  formed  in  the  second  century  of  our  era.  There 
must  have  been  some  powerful  reason  for  this.  Both 
Jews  and  Christians,  as  we  have  seen,  cherished  the 
highest  esteem  for  the  Septuagint  version  in  the 
apostolic  age  and  the  times  immediately  succeeding 
it.  But  by-and-by  a  very  different  feeling  sprang 
up  among  the  Jews,  and  led  to  those  strangely  in- 
consistent utterances  which  are  found  in  the  Talmud 
with  regard  to  the  work  of  the  Seventy.  While  the 
early  rabbis  expressed  themselves  in  almost  enthusi- 
astic terms  with  respect  to  the  Greek  version,  the 
later  rabbis  adopted  a  totally  different  tone,  and 
allowed  themselves  to  be  betrayed  into  many  wild 
sayings  in  consequence.  They  spoke  of  the  common 
Greek  version  as  an  accursed  thing.  They  averred 
that  on  the  day  on  which  the  seventy  translators  met 
a  supernatural  darkness  covered  the  earth,  with  other 


224  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

Statements  of  the  same  kind.  Now,  whence  arose 
this  change  of  feeling  in  regard  to  the  Septuagint  ? 
Simply,  as  would  appear,  from  the  fact  that  it  was 
deemed  too  favourable  to  the  claims  of  Christianity. 
Having  often  the  worst  of  the  argument  when  an 
appeal  was  made  to  JNIessianic  passages  as  contained 
in  the  Septuagint,  the  Jews  desired  a  version  which 
might  embarrass  them  less  in  their  controversies 
with  the  Christians.  And  hence,  apparently,  the 
origin  of  the  first  of  the  three  versions  about  to  be 
described. 

The  author  of  this  version  was  one  Aquila,  a  native 
of  Pontus.  Some  strange  stories  are  told  regarding 
him  by  ancient  writers,  which  are  not  worthy  of 
repetition.  All  that  we  know  for  certain  is  that, 
from  being  a  heathen,  he  became  a  convert  to 
Judaism,  and  was  employed  by  the  Jews  to  translate 
their  sacred  writings  into  Greek.  This  new  version 
was  undoubtedly  intended  to  be  a  rival  to  the  Septua- 
gint, and  did  indeed  supplant  its  use  among  the 
Jews.  The  great  characteristic  of  the  translation  of 
Aquila  is  its  extreme  literalism.  Greek  idioms  and 
even  grammar  are  violated,  in  order  that  an  exact 
adherence  to  the  Hebrew  may  be  preserved.  This 
literality  of  rendering,  while  worthless  as  to  the  sense, 
would  have  been  most  valuable  as  respects  the  text 
of  the  Old  Testament,  if  larger  portions  of  the 
version  of  Aquila  had  reached  our  day.     But  only  a 


OLD  TESTAMENT  VERSIONS  AFTER  CHRIST.    225 

few  fragments  remain,  and  these  do  little  more  than 
illustrate  the  principles  on  which  the  version  was 
formed.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Aquila  was  a 
good  Hebrew  scholar,  and  his  work,  though  not 
generally  liked  by  the  Christians,  is  sometimes 
highly  praised  by  the  most  learned  of  the  Fathers, 
such  as  Origen  and  Jerome.  The  version  of  Aquila 
is  referred  to  by  Irenaeus  (about  185  a.d.),  and 
appears  to  have  been  completed  in  the  reign  of 
Hadrian,  say  129  a.d. 

About  half  a  century  after  Aquila,  a  version  of 
the  Old  Testament  into  Greek  was  also  formed  by 
Theodotion.  This  may  perhaps  rather  be  styled  a 
revision  of  the  Septuagint  than  an  absolutely  new 
version.  Its  author  is  said  to  have  been  by  birth 
an  Ephesian,  and  by  profession  an  Ebionite,  that  is, 
a  member  of  the  early  sect  of  Christians  who  held  a 
low,  or  merely  human,  view  of  the  person  of  Christ. 
The  work  of  Theodotion  was  largely  used  by  Chris- 
tians generally,  and  to  this  day  his  version  of  the 
Book  of  Daniel  is  usually  found  in  printed  editions 
of  the  Septuagint,  in  place  of  the  translation  which 
properly  belongs  to  it.  Theodotion,  as  well  as 
Aquila,  is  referred  to  by  Irenaeus  as  having  given 
an  inadequate  rendering  of  the  Hebrew  word  trans- 
lated 'Wirgin"  in  our  Authorised  Version  in  Isa. 
vii.   14. 

Symmachus,  who  is  said  by  some  of  the  Fathers 

15 


226  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

also  to  have  been  an  Ebionite,  but  is  called  by 
others  a  Samaritan,  was  the  author  of  a  third  Greek 
version,  which  appeared  about  the  end  of  the  second 
century.  It  does  not  seem  to  have  been  known  to 
Irenaeus,  since,  if  so,  he  would  probably  have  re- 
ferred to  it,  as  he  does  to  the  versions  of  Aquila 
and  Theodotion.  Very  little  can  be  said  respecting 
the  work  of  Symmachus.  It  apparently  occupied  a 
middle  place  among  the  three  versions  mentioned,  not 
being  so  exact  as  that  of  Aquila,  nor  so  inaccurate 
as  that  of  Theodotion.  The  author  is  said  to  have 
lived  under  the  Emperor  Severus,  as  already  indicated. 
Besides  these  versions  of  Aquila,  Theodotion,  and 
Symmachus,  there  were  also  some  other  fragmentary 
Greek  translations,  of  which  Origen  made  use  in  his 
great  work  bearing  the  name  of  Hexapla.  Before 
acquiring  a  knowledge  of  Hebrew,  Origen  appears 
to  have  compiled  a  work  called  the  Tefrapla,  or 
'Tour/old  Bible,  containing  the  versions  of  Aquila, 
Symmachus,  the  Septuagint,  and  Theodotion,  in 
parallel  columns.  But,  after  he  mastered  the 
Hebrew  language,  this  mighty  worker  proceeded 
to  the  formation  of  a  Hexapla,  or  Sixjold  Bible, 
comprising  first  the  Hebrew  text,  next,  the  same 
in  Greek  letters,  and  then  the  versions  as  arranged 
in  the  Tetrapla.  In  his  greater  work,  according  to 
Eusebius,  he  included  the  fragmentary  translations 
which  have  been  mentioned. 


OLD  TESTAMENT  VERSIONS  AFTER  CHRIST.   227 

We  now  proceed  to  glance  at  the  Syriac  versions 
of  the  Old  Testament. 

A  special  interest  attaches  to  the  earliest  Syriac 
translation  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  having  been 
the  first  version  after  the  time  of  Christ  which  was 
made  directly  from  the  Hebrew.  Its  date  cannot 
be  accurately  fixed.  Some  have  argued  that  it  was 
formed  long  before  the  Christian  era,  and  others 
that  it  arose  about  the  end  of  the  apostolic  age  ; 
but  the  probability  is,  that,  like  the  Syriac  version 
of  the  New  Testament,  it  was  made  some  time  in 
the  second  century  of  our  era.  The  celebrated 
Syrian  writer,  Ephraem,  who  lived  in  the  fourth 
century,  refers  to  it  in  terms  which  seem  to  imply 
that  even  then  it  was  regarded  as  ancient ;  and  for 
this  reason,  among  others,  we  are  led  to  assign  its 
origin  to  the  date  which  has  been  mentioned. 

By  whom  this  Syriac  version  of  the  Old  Testament 
was  made  is  utterly  unknown.  We  cannot  even  say 
with  certainty  whether  it  sprung  from  a  Jewish  or 
Christian  source.  The  fact  that  it  was  formed 
directly  from  the  Hebrew  would  seem  to  point  to 
a  Jew  as  its  author,  since  a  knowledge  of  the 
Hebrew  language  hardly  existed  among  Christians. 
But  as  the  version  was  undoubtedly  intended  for 
Christian  use,  the  probability  is  that  its  author,  or 
authors,  were  Jews  who  were  acquainted  with  ancient 
Hebrew,  and  had  been   converted   to  Christianity. 


228  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

The  truth,  however,  is  that  on  this  point  we  have 
nothing  to  trust  to'  but  conjecture.* 

This  version  of  the  Old  Testament,  along  with 
the  Syriac  version  of  the  New  Testament,  was,  at  a 
later  period,  known  by  the  name  of  Peshito,  that  is, 
simple^  and  was  perhaps  so  called  as  adhering  closely 
to  the  original,  and  avoiding  allegorical  interpreta- 
tions. Both  from  its  age  and  character  as  a  version, 
it  would  be  of  supreme  importance  for  aiding  in  the 
settlement  of  the  true  Hebrew  text,  were  its  own  text 
in  a  satisfactory  condition.  But,  unfortunately,  such 
is  not  at  present  the  case.  A  critical  edition  of  the 
Peshito  version  of  the  Old  Testament  is,  like  a 
similar  edition  of  the  Septuagint,  still  among  the 
desiderata  of  Biblical  science. 

Until  such  editions  have  been  prepared,  nothing 
positive  can  be  determined  as  to  the  relation  be- 
tween this  Syriac  translation  and  the  Septuagint. 
In  the  meantime,  all  that  can  be  said  is,  that  the 
Syriac  version  is  found  to  be  coloured  from  that  of 
the    Seventy,    and   agrees  with  it  not   unfrequently 


*  Canon  Westcott  appears  to  speak  more  strongly  than  the 
data  will  warrant  when  he  says,  *'  The  Old  Testament,  no  less 
than  the  New,  was  certainly  translated  by  a  Christian,  and  the 
whole  work  was  probably  revised  and  completed  early  in  the 
second  century,  at  Edessa,  which  was  at  that  time  the  centre 
of  an  important  Christian  school." — The  Bible  in  the  Churchy 
p.  132. 


OLD  TESTAMENT  VERSIONS  AFTER  CHRIST,    229 

against  the  existing  Hebrew  text.  But,  like  the 
Septuagint,  the  Syriac  gives  a  general  support  to  the 
Hebrew,  as  at  present  accepted. 

Another  Syriac  version  of  the  Old  Testament  was 
made  from  the  Greek  about  the  beginning  of  the 
seventh  century  of  our  era.  This  version  was  based 
on  the  Hexapla  of  Origen,  formerly  described.  It 
contains  the  marks  and  references  which  existed  in 
that  great  critical  work,  and  is,  indeed,  the  source 
from  which  we  obtain  our  chief  acquaintance  with 
the  results  of  Origen's  labours  in  connection  with 
the  text  of  the  Old  Testament.  When  a  critical 
edition  of  the  Septuagint  comes  to  be  prepared,  the 
version  now  referred  to  must  play  an  important  part 
in  its  construction.* 

The  next  subject  which  calls  for  notice  is  a  con- 
sideration of  the  Latin  versions  of  the  Old  Testament. 

We  here  enter  a  region  of  the  deepest  interest. 
With  the  exception  of  the  Septuagint,  no  version  of 
the  Old  Testament  can  vie  in  importance  with  the 
Vylgate.  Both  the  two  great  classical  languages  have 
been  highly  honoured  in  connection  with  the  sacred 
Scriptures.  The  Greek,  as  we  have  already  seen,  was 
the  first  language  into  which  the  Old  Testament  was 
translated,  and  furnished  in  the  Septuagint  version  the 


Dr.  Tregelles  in  Smith's  Diet,  of  Bible,  iii.  1625  fif. 


230  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

Bible  of  the  early  Christians,  of  the  inspired  Apostles, 
yea,  of  the  Divine  Redeemer  Himself.  A  peculiar 
and  pre-eminent  distinction  has  thus  been  conferred 
upon  the  Greek  language  in  connection  with  the 
history  of  Christianity.  But  the  Latin  has  hardly 
fallen  short  in  glory.  It  was,  for  ages,  the  language 
of  the  whole  Christian  Church.  It  remains,  far 
beyond  any  other  tongue,  the  depository  of  sacred 
literature.  Hymns  and  prayers  and  expositions 
and  dissertations  innumerable  are  enshrined  in  it. 
To  this  day  it  forms  the  medium  through  which 
the  far-spreading  Church  of  Rome  presents  her 
worship.  It  is  therefore  with  peculiar  interest  that 
we  approach  the  subject  of  the  Latin  versions,  and 
inquire  into  the  history  of  what  is  known  as  the 
Vulgate  at  the  present  day. 

As  might  have  been  expected  from  the  wide 
acquaintance  with  Greek  which  existed  throughout 
the  civilized  world  at  the  commencement  of  our 
era,  the  Septuagint  version  sufficed  for  the  majority 
of  those  peoples  then  living  under  the  sway  of 
imperial  Rome.  In  Italy  especially  the  Gre^k 
language  had  taken  deep  root,  and  was  everywhere 
current.  As  I  have  elsewhere  said,  **  In  the  reign 
of  Tiberius,  as  Valerius  Maximus,  a  contemporary 
writer,  informs  as,  the  Senate  resounded  even  to 
deafening  with  Greek  debates ;  and  Dio  Cassius 
relates  that  the  same  emperor  was  accustomed  very 


OLD  TESTAMENT  VERSIONS  AFTER  CHRIST.    231 

frequently  to  hear  cases  argued,  and  himself  to  in- 
vestigate them,  in  the  Greek  language.  Suetonius 
bears  equally  striking  testimony  to  the  very  general 
use  of  Greek  by  the  Romans  under  Tiberius  and 
Claudius  ;  and,  by  the  account  which  he  gives  of 
the  efforts  made  by  the  former  emperor  to  dis- 
courage its  use  in  certain  cases,  shows  how  greatly 
it  had  encroached  on  the  vernacular  language.  In 
the  reign  of  Domitian,  as  we  infer  from  Martial, 
it  was  proof  of  absolute  rusticity  not  to  be  perfectly 
familiar  with  the  tongue  of  Greece ;  while  in  the 
reign  of  Trajan,  as  we  learn  from  Juvenal,  that 
language  was  continually  employed  by  his  fellow- 
citizens  for  all  sorts  of  purposes.  And  in  these,  as 
well  as  other  similar  intimations  contained  in  the 
classical  writers,  we  find  proof  that  while,  during 
the  period  in  question,  almost  countless  dialects, 
in  addition  to  the  native  Latin,  might  have  been 
heard  among  the  vast  and  multifarious  population 
of  Rome,  the  various  tribes  there  mixed  together 
possessed  in  the  language  of  Greece,  then  become 
the  language  of  the  world,  a  means  whereby  they 
could  communicate  with  one  another."* 

Such,  then,  being  the  linguistic  condition  of  Italy 
at  the  time  referred  to,  we  are  not  surprised  to  find 


*  See  my  Discussions  on  the  Gospels,  p.  30  (2nd  ed.),  where 
the  passages  referred  to  are  quoted  in  the  originals. 


232  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

that  no  need  for  a  Latin  version  of  Scripture  was 
felt  in  that  country  for  many  generations  after 
Christ.  And,  in  fact,  the  first  Latin  translation  did 
not  arise  in  Italy  at  all.  It  had  its  origin  in  North 
Africa,  where  a  knowledge  of  Greek,  which  certainly 
was  at  one  time  possessed,  seems  to  have  died  out 
in  the  course  of  the  second  century. 

Accordingly,  it  is  from  Tertullian,  himself  an 
African,  and  the  earliest  of  the  Latin  Fathers,  that 
we  first  hear  of  a  version  of  Scripture  in  the  proper 
language  of  the  Romans.  His  words  clearly  imply 
that  a  popular  Latin  version  of  the  Bible  circulated 
in  his  day  (about  200  a.d.)  among  the  churches  of 
Africa.  This  is  known  as  the  *'  Old  Latin,"  and  its 
formation  may  probably  be  dated  about  the  middle 
of  the  second  century.  A  goodly  number  of  manu- 
scripts of  this  version,  more  or  less  perfect,  are  still 
in  existence,  and  testify  to  the  peculiar  Latin — 
vigorous  and  racy,  but  very  different  from  that  of 
the  classical  writers — in  which  it  was  composed. 

So  long  as  the  old  Latin  version  was  confined 
to  Africa,  it  seems  to  have  remained  substantially 
unchanged.  But  very  different  was  its  fate  on  being 
introduced  into  Italy.  As  the  Greek  language  still 
continued  to  be  pretty  accurately  and  widely  known 
in  that  country,  corrections  were  naturally  made  on 
the  old  Latin  :  its  errors  were  replaced  by  better 
renderings,    and   its    provincial    roughnesses    were 


OLD  TESTAMENT  VERSIONS  AFTER  CHRIST,    233 

smoothed  and  softened.  At  length  a  recension, 
known  as  "  the  Italian,"  was  formed,  and  seems  to 
have  obtained  some  degree  of  authority  over  the 
others.  But  great  embarrassment  as  to  the  Latin 
text  continued  to  prevail.  There  was  no  standard 
to  which  a  general  appeal  could  be  made,  and  the 
differences  of  rendering  in  the  various  copies  were 
most  perplexing  and  vexatious.  At  last,  towards 
the  close  of  the  fourth  century,  a  man  was  raised 
up  by  providence,  who  was  eminently  fitted  for 
remedying  this  uncertainty  and  confusion. 

That  man  was  found  in  St.  Jerome,*  next  to  Origen 
the  most  learned  of  all  the  Fathers  of  the  Church. 
Born  in  329  a.d.,  he  spent  a  very  long  life  (died 
420  A.D.)  in  the  most  devoted  Biblical  labours. 
Among  his  other  vast  undertakings  was  an  improved 
translation  into  Latin  of  the  sacred  Scriptures.  The 
discrepancies  and  corruptions  which  had  been  in- 
troduced into  the  various  existing  texts  could  no 
longer  be  tolerated  ;  and,  at  the  urgent  request  of 
Damasus,  then  Bishop  of  Rome,  Jerome  set  himself 
to  the  work  of  correction.  Having  begun  his  work 
with  the  Gospels,  he  proceeded  to  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, intending  only  at  the  first  to  amend  the 
existing   version   which   had  been  based    upon  the 

*  His  full  name  was  Eusebius  Hieronymus  Sophronius,  but 
he  is  usually  spoken  of  as  St.  Jerome.  He  was  a  native  of 
Stridon  in  Dalmatia. 


234  O^^    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 


Septuagint.  But  after  he  acquired  a  knowledge  of 
Hebrew,  nothing  would  satisfy  him  but  a  translation 
direct  from  the  original.  This  accordingly  he  pre- 
pared with  great  toil  and  care,  and  the  work  thus 
produced  is,  in  substance,  the  Latin  Vulgate,  as  in 
use  by  the  Church  of  Rome  at  the  present  day. 

Jerome,  however,  experienced  the  usual  fate  of 
reformers.  His  work,  though  a  vast  improvement 
on  previous  Latin  versions,  was  bitterly  assailed  by 
his  contemporaries,  and  for  long  lay  comparatively 
neglected.  It  was  not  till  some  centuries  afterwards 
that  the  new  version  completely  supplanted  the  old, 
though  it  had  steadily  been  winning  its  way  to  public 
favour.  Gregory  the  Great,  about  the  close  of  the 
sixth  century,  acknowledged  that  Jerome's  translation 
was  equally  in  use  with  the  old  Latin,  and  it  was 
almost  universally  accepted  in  the  course  of  another 
hundred  years.  As  could  not  but  happen,  it  too 
suffered  much  corruption  in  the  course  of  time.  It 
was  revised  oftener  than  once,  until  at  last  it  assumed 
a  printed  form  about  a.d.  1455,  being  the  first  book 
that  ever  issued  from  the  press. 

As  thus  printed,  the  text  of  the  Latin  Vulgate  was 
very  far  from  pure.  Nor  was  much  done  for  it  in  the 
editions  which  followed,  until  the  religious  contro- 
versies of  the  sixteenth  century  directed  special 
attention  to  the  subject.  The  Council  of  Trent 
passed  a  decree    on   April    8th,  1546,  bearing   upon 


OLD  TESTAMENT  VERSIONS  AFTER  CHRIST.    235 

the  sacred  Scriptures,  but  a  considerable  time 
elapsed  before  any  practical  step  was  taken  towards 
securing  an  amended  and  authorised  edition.  At 
length,  after  various  tentative  efforts,  a  revised 
text  of  the  Vulgate  was  put  forth  under  the  auspices 
of  Pope  Sixtus  V.  in  1590.  But  the  imperious  cha- 
racter of  the  Pope  had  led  to  the  insertion  of  many 
false  readings,  and  this  edition,  though  issued  under 
pontifical  sanction,  was  soon  felt  to  be  eminently 
unsatisfactory.  Various  clumsy  and  disingenuous 
efforts  were  made  by  the  popes  immediately  suc- 
ceeding to  account  for  and  correct  its  errors,  but 
a  thorough  revision  of  it  did  not  take  place  till  two 
years  afterwards.  In  1592,  a  decidedly  improved 
text  was  issued  by  Clement  VIII.,  and  the  Clementine 
text  henceforth  superseded,  in  the  estimation  of  all 
competent  judges,  the  Sixtine,  as  well  as  all  previous 
editions  of  the  Vulgate. 

As  thus  issued  and  authorised,  the  cun-ent  Latin 
Bible  remains  at  the  present  day,  no  thoroughly 
critical  edition  having  yet  seen  the  light.  Much 
still  requires  to  be  done  before  its  own  text  can  be 
regarded  as  satisfactory,  or  before  its  full  value  can 
be  brought  out  as  perhaps  the  most  important  means 
at  our  command  for  the  final  settlement  of  many 
critical  questions  connected  with  the  Greek  and 
Hebrew  Scriptures.  But  taking  it  as  it  stands,  the 
version  bears  undoubted  witness   to  the  substantial 


236  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

accuracy  of  the  received  text  of  the  Old  Testament. 
One  of  its  most  remarkable  discrepancies  is  found  in 
Gen.  iii.  15.  As  is  well  known,  the  Vulgate  there 
reads  ipsa,  for  ipse,  so  that  the  rendering  of  the 
passage  into  English  must  be,  '*  she  shall  bruise  thy 
head,"  instead  of  that  which  is  found  in  our  Author- 
ised Version.  Every  one  knows  that  this  rendering 
has  been  supposed  to  imply  that  there  is  a  reference 
in  the  passage  to  the  Virgin  Mary.  But  there  can 
be  no  doubt  that  it  is  a  false  translation  of  the 
Hebrew.  The  form  of  the  pronoun  is  masculine  in 
the  original,  and  this  is  preserved  in  the  Septuagint 
version.  There  seems  to  be  even  good  reason  to 
believe  that  the  primitive  reading  in  the  Vulgate 
itself  was  ipse;"^  and  if  so,  it  is  much  to  be  desired 
that  the  correct  rendering  should  be  restored,  that 
one  great  cause  of  wrangling  between  Catholics  and 
Protestants  may  be  finally  removed. 

Before  quitting  the  subject  of  the  venerable  Latin 
version,  I  desire  to  express  my  full  concurrence  in 
the  following  eloquent  and  generous  words  of  Dr. 
Eadie :— "  Yet,  in  spite  of  such  points  in  its  history," 
referring  to  the  many  discrepancies  between  the 
Sixtine  and  Clementine  editions,  "  the  Vulgate  has 
many  claims  for  the  place  which  it  so  long  held,  and 

*  See  on  this  and  other  points  connected  with  the  Vulgate 
the  exhaustive  article  of  Canon  Westcott  in  Smith's  Diet,  of  the 
Bible,  iii.  1689  flf. 


OLD  TESTAMENT  VERSIONS  AFTER  CHRIST,    zyj 

for  the  good  which  it  so  often  effected.  It  was,  in 
the  absence  of  the  original,  the  only  accessible  Bible 
in  mediaeval  Western  Europe, — *a  light  shining,' 
though  with  veiled  lustre,  *  in  a  dark  place.'  It  did 
its  appointed  work,  and  brought  peace  and  strength 
to  many  hearts,  opening  up  to  them  a  glimpse  of  the 
glorified  One  above  and  beyond  the  crucifix,  creating 
a  fulness  of  trust  that  felt  no  need  of  saintly  media- 
tion, nursing  a  loyalty  to  Him  so  intense  and  absorb- 
ing, that  it  looked  down  upon  the  keys  of  St.  Peter 
as  a  paltry  symbol,  while  it  sustained  a  confidence  in 
Him  that  hard  dogma  could  not  deaden,  and  an 
adoration  of  Him  which  a  complicated  and  inflexible 
ritual  could  not  petrify.  The  religious  community, 
whose  book  it  was,  kept  the  Roman  empire  from 
falling  into  barbarism  at  its  dissolution.  In  spite  of 
its  growing  superstition  and  tyranny,  the  Western 
Church  scattered  round  it  many  blessings.  Music, 
painting,  and  architecture  were  fostered  by  it;  the 
figured  windows  in  the  churches  were  the  poor  man's 
Bible,  where  he  saw  in  vivid  group  and  colouring  the 
power  and  pity  of  the  Son  of  Mary.  Its  compact 
organization  gave  it  a  great  power,  which  it  often 
wielded  for  the  good  of  society  in  days  of  ignorance 
and  war.  It  broke  the  bonds  of  the  serf,  opened  an 
asylum  for  the  exile  and  outcast,  restrained  the  fury 
of  the  oppressor,  and  softened  the  haughty  rigour  of 
the  nobility.     Grandees  quailed  before  its  ministers 


238  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION, 

invested  with  a  superhuman  authority  which  they 
were  afraid  to  resist,  and  were  unable  to  define,  for 
its  mastery  stretched  into  the  invisible  world.  The 
abbey  was  often  a  rebuke  to  the  castle,  and  was  an 
almshouse  for  the  poor,  a  hospital  for  the  sick,  an 
inn  for  the  traveller,  and  a  retreat  for  the  weary  and 
forlorn  in  heart.  Its  farms  presented  the  best  speci- 
mens of  tillage,  and  its  blooming  orchards  were  a 
reproof  to  all  who  loitered  in  the  *  vineyard  of  the 
sluggard.'  In  the  midst  of  many  drawbacks,  incon- 
sistencies and  errors,  the  Latin  Church  may  glory  in 
pointing  to  the  heroic  and  self-denying  toils  and 
sufferings  of  its  missionaries  and  martyrs,  whose 
romantic  lives  are  grander  than  fiction,  and  who  met 
their  death,  not  merely  with  saintly  calmness,  but 
prophetic  exultation.  Those  noble  souls  were  bap- 
tized with  the  Holy  Spirit ;  the  true  unction  filled 
them  with  a  seraphic  devoutness,  which  did  not 
depend  on  a  gorgeous  service,  with  its  music,  in- 
cense, and  images.  The  mystics,  who  had  felt  the 
power  of  the  unseen,  and  were  rapt  into  hidden 
communing  with  God,  did  not  rest  on  a  sacerdotal 
ministry.  The  Houses,  especially  of  the  Benedictine 
class,  so  magnificent  in  architecture,  often  and 
honestly  strove  in  earlier  times  to  realize  the  ideal  of 
their  founder.  In  them  was  conserved  whatever  of 
science  or  art  was  known ;  and  in  them  was  copied, 
for  circulation,  the  Latin  Bible,  which  preserved  for 


OLD  TESTAMENT  VERSIONS  AFTER  CHRiST.   239 

centuries  the  knowledge   of  the  Gospel,  and  gave 
their  first  inspiration  to  the  Reformers."* 

We  now  proceed  to  a  brief  consideration  of  other 
ancient -translations  of  the  Old  Testament. 

The  jEthiopic  version  seems  to  have  been  formed 
not  long  after  the  introduction  of  Christianity  into 
Abyssinia  in  the  course  of  the  fourth  century.  The 
Old  Testament  translation  was  made,  not  from  the 
original  Hebrew,  but  from  the  Greek  version,  and, 
when  thoroughly  investigated,  will  thus  aid  in  the 
formation  of  a  critical  edition  of  the  Septuagint. 
The  author  of  it  is  totally  unknown.  He  was  evi- 
dently but  an  imperfect  Greek  scholar,  as  he  frequently 
confounds  words  which  are  similar  in  form,  but 
totally  different  in  signification. 

Two  Egyptian  versions,  at  least,  were  also  formed 
certainly  not  later  than  the  fourth  century.  By  that 
time  the  Greek  language,  which  was  once  so  preva- 
lent in  Lower  Egypt,  appears  to  have  died  out,  and 
the  Scriptures  were  therefore  translated  into  Coptic, 
the  mother-tongue  of  the  people.  One  version,  now 
known  as  the  Memphitic,  circulated  in  Lower  Egypt, 
and  the  other,  which  is  styled  the  Thebaic,  was 
prepared  specially  for  the  inhabitants  of  Upper 
Egypt.     Some  fragments  of  what  has  been  deemed 


•   The  English  Bible,  ii.  I  ID, 


240  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

a  third  version  have  also  been  discovered,  but  are  of 
no  importance.  The  Thebaic  and  Memphitic  ver- 
sions, however,  are  of  great  value  for  the  purposes  of 
criticism.  They  were  formed  independently  of  each 
other,  but  both  from  the  Greek.  Here,  then,  again 
are  furnished  valuable  materials  to  assist  in  the 
preparation  of  that  trustworthy  edition  of  the  Septua- 
gint  which  does  not  yet  exist,  but  which  is,  for  many 
reasons,  so  earnestly  to  be  desired. 

We  have  next  to  notice  the  ancient  and  important 
Gothic  version.  More  is  known  respecting  its  forma- 
tion than  is  generally  the  case  with  the  early  transla- 
tions of  Scripture.  Its  author  was  the  celebrated 
Bishop  Ulphilas,  who  died  in  the  year  388  a.d.  It 
is  said  that  he  held  Arian  or  semi-Arian  views,  but 
hardly  a  {race  of  doctrinal  bias  is  to  be  found  in  what 
remains  of  his  translation  of  the  Scriptures.  Unfor- 
tunately nothing  more  than  fragments  of  the  Old 
Testament  have  yet  been  discovered.  The  version 
was  made  from  the  Greek;  and  as  its  date  is  not 
later  than  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century,  it  would 
form  another  valuable  witness  to  the  text  of  the 
Septuagint  then  current,  were  larger  portions  of  it  to 
be  found.  From  what  has  already  happened,  such 
an  event  is  not  altogether  hopeless.  The  late 
Cardinal    Mai,    on    examining    some    palimpsest* 

*  This  expression  literally  means  what  has  httn  scraped  again, 
and,  as  applied  to  manuscripts,  denotes  that  an  attempt  has  been 


OLD  TESTAMENT  VERSIONS  AFTER  CHRIST.    241 

manuscripts,  discovered  that  the  Gothic  version  was 
the  original  writing  over  which  the  latter  had  been 
inscribed,  and  something  similar  may  occur  again, 
with  perhaps  larger  results. 

Of  the  Armenian  version  little  requires  to  be  said. 
It  was  not  formed  before  the  fifth  century,  since  up 
to  that  period  the  Armenian  Christians  made  use  of 
the  Syriac  version.  The  first  attempts  at  translation 
into  the  language  of  Armenia  were  based  not  on  the 
Greek,  far  less  on  the  Hebrew,  but  on  the  Syriac. 
Some  Armenian  delegates,  however,  attended  the 
CEcumenical  Co,uncil  held  at  Ephesus  in  a.d.  431, 
and  brought  back  with  them  copies  of  the  Greek 
Scriptures.  Eff'orts  were  then  made  to  obtain  a 
knowledge  of  the  Greek  language,  and  an  Armenian 
version  of  the  Septuagint  and  the  Greek  New  Testa- 
ment was  ere  long  completed,  the  former  unsatis- 
factory translations  from  the  Syriac  being  set  aside, 
although  their  influence  may  still  be  traced.  The 
Latin  Vulgate  was  also  made  use  of  in  forming  the 
Armenian  version,  but,  to  a  considerable  extent,  it 
is  possessed  of  an  independent  character. 

Descending  now  to  a  considerably  late  date,  we 
encounter  the  Slavonic  version,  which  seems  to  have 
been  formed,  as  a  whole,  in  the  course  of  the  ninth 
century.      With    this    may   be    classed   the   Arabic, 

made  to  erase  a  first  writing,  that  the  parchment  or  paper  might 
receive  a  second. 

i6 


242  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

Persian,  and  Anglo-Saxon  versions,  none  of  which 
can  be  regarded  as  having  much  authority  with 
respect  to  questions  bearing  on  the  original  texts. 
Some  of  them  were  based  on  the  Septuagint,  and 
others  on  the  Vulgate  ;  but  all  are  too  modern  to 
have  much  weight  in  determining  the  primitive 
rea  lings  of  the  versions  from  which  they  were 
formed. 

It  must  be  obvious,  from  what  has  been  said  in 
this  chapter,  how  much  yet  remains  to  be  done  in 
connection  with  the  text  of  the  Old  Testament.  The 
early  versions  of  it  which  were  made  require  to  be 
far  more  thoroughly  investigated.  Beginning  with 
the  Septuagint,  which  is,  in  many  respects,  the  most 
interesting  and  important  of  all,  an  earnest  effort 
must  be  made  to  establish  its  true  text.  As  has 
been  before  suggested,  this  is  one  of  the  greatest 
desiderata  in  Biblical  science,  and  whosoever  accom- 
plishes the  task  will  perform  a  service  of  inestimable 
importance  to  the  cause  of  sacred  criticism.  And 
then  the  same  thing  requires  to  be  done  with  respect 
to  the  Syriac  and  Latin  versions,  not  to  speak  oi 
those  less  important  authorities  which  have  been 
mentioned. 

Till  these  important  preliminary  processes  have 
been  accomplished,  any  amended  version  of  the  Old 
Testament  can  only  be   tentative   and  provisional. 


OLD  TESTAMENT  VERSIONS  AFTEJi  CHRIST.   243 

As  we  shall  see  in  the  next  chapter,  our  common 
English  translation  is  the  result  of  labours  carried 
on  by  many  different  men,  and  with  very  various 
appliances  and  advantages.  Means  of  improving 
upon  it  now  certainly  exist  to  a  large  extent,  and 
will,  no  doubt,  be  diligently  employed  in  the  prepara- 
tion of  the  forthcoming  revised  version.  But  much 
still  remains  to  be  done  ;  and  perhaps  one  of  the 
most  valuable  effects  flowing  from  the  revision  now 
in  hand  will  be  the  stimulus  it  will  give  to  scholars 
to  enter  zealously  on  those  labours  that  have  yet  to 
be  gone  through  in  connection  both  with  the  text 
and  the  translation  of  the  Old  Testament, 


CHAPTER  XII. 

ENGLISH  VERSIONS  OF  THE   OLD  AND  NEW 
TESTAMENTS. 

IT  has  appeared  in  the  preceding  chapters  that 
there  are  not  a  few  corrections  which  require 
to  be  made  in  the  current  English  version  of  the 
Old  Testament.  In  fact,  there  is  probably  not  a 
single  passage  of  more  than  a  few  verses  in  which 
a  nearer  or  more  accurate  approach  to  the  meaning 
of  the  original  may  not  be  made.  This  is  not  to 
be  wondered  at :  the  wonder  rather  is  that  such  a 
high  standard  of  general  excellence  was  reached, 
considering  the  time  and  circumstances  in  which 
the  version  was  formed.  To  these  I  shall  now 
briefly  direct  the  reader's  attention. 

It  is  stated  on  the  title-page  of  the  Authorised 
Version,  that  that  version  was  "  translated  out  of 
the  original  tongues."  But  that  statement  must  be 
taken  with  some  qualification.  While  the  translators 
no  doubt  always  had  the  original  texts  before  them 
as  they  prosecuted  their  work,  they  nevertheless 
leant  very  much   on   the   results  attained  by  those 


246  OLD    TESTAMENl   REVISION. 


who  had  preceded  them.  It  has  been  correctly- 
said,  with  respect  to  the  work  which  they  produced, 
that  * "  former  translations  and  comments,  nearly 
twenty  in  number,  were  the  real  sources,  not  the 
original  texts.  Instead  of  the  latter  being  the 
fountain,  they  furnished  mere  corrections  of  former 
versions.  The  translators'  own  words  imply  this  : 
'Truly,  good  Christian  reader,  we  never  thought 
from  the  beginning  that  we  should  need  to  make 
a  new  translation,  nor  yet  to  make  of  a  bad  one  a 
good  one,  but  to  make  a  good  one  better,  or  of 
many  good  ones  one  principal  good  one,  not  justly  to 
be  excepted  against :  that  hath  been  our  endeavour, 
that  our  mark.'"  *  Such  being  the  state  of  the  case, 
we  must  necessarily  glance  at  those  efforts  which  had 
been  put  forth  to  translate  the  Bible  into  English 
before  the  appearance  of  our  present  Authorised 
Version. 

It  is  an  interesting  fact,  that,  at  a  very  early  period 
in  the  Irlstory  of  our  country,  attempts  were  made  to 
translate  portions  of  the  Bible  into  the  language  of 
the  people.  Among  those  who  laboured  for  this  end, 
the  names  of  the  venerable  Bede  (died  735  a.d.) 
and  the  great  King  Alfred  (died  901  a.d.)  stand 
forth    conspicuous.      Bede    is  well   known   to  have 

*  Dr.  Davidson  On  a  Fresh  Revision  of  the  English  Old 
Testament,  p.  i. 


ENGLISH   VERSIONS.  247 

died  while  dictating  his  translation  of  the  last  verses 
of  St.  John's  Gospel,  and  of  Alfred  we  are  told  that 
he  set  forth  in  the  mother-tongue  a  version  of  part 
of  the  Book  of  Exodus  (ch.  xx. — xxiii.),  while  he  ex- 
pressed a  desire  that  every  one  should  be  able  to 
read  the  Scriptures  in  the  then  language  of  England. 
Indeed,  he  was  credited  in  later  traditions  with 
having  been  a  translator  of  the  whole  Bible. ''^ 

Various  attempts  at  translating  portions  of  Scrip- 
ture into  the  language  of  the  English  people  con- 
tinued to  be  made.  One  of  the  most  important  of 
these  is  known  as  the  Ormulum,  and  may  be  dated 
about  the  close  of  the  twelfth  century.  It  consists 
of  20,000  lines,  embracing  the  Gospels  and  Acts  in 
a  kind  of  iambic  verse,  of  which  the  two  following 
lines  from  the  dedication  of  the  author,  Orm,  to  his 
brother,  may  be  given  as  a  specimen : — 

**  Ice  hafe  wennd  inntill  Ennglissh 
Goddspelless  hallghe  lore,"f 

which  may  be  thus  represented  in  our  modern 
speech  : — 

•*  I  have  turned  into  English 
The  Gospel's  holy  lore." 

Several  other  metrical  versions  of  parts  of  Scripture 

*  Smith's  Diet,  of  Bible,  art.  Auth.  Vers.,  p.  1665. 
f  Eadie's  English  Bible,  i.  30. 


248  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

followed,  and  fragmentary  prose  translations  still 
exist,  which  must  be  referred  to  much  the  same 
period 

But   it   is   not  till  we  reach  the  times  of  John 
Wycliffe  (about  a.d.    1360)  that  we  meet  with  a 
complete  translation  of  the  Bible  into  the  English 
language.     This   version  of  Wycliffe   has   attracted 
much   attention,    both   from   the    circumstances   in 
which  it  was  produced,  and  from  the  inherent  in- 
terest attaching  to  the  work.      It  was  in  the  face 
not    only   of    much   discouragement,    but   of  great 
personal  danger,  that  the  devoted  Rector  of  Lutter- 
worth  prosecuted   and   completed    his   vast   under- 
taking.    No  law  of  the  Church  had,  indeed,  as  yet 
been  passed  against  vernacular  translations.     They 
had,  on   the  contrary,  been  patronised   by   various 
papal  authorities  in  high  position.     But  Wycliffe  was 
already  a  marked  man  before  he  entered  on  the  work 
of  translation.      He   had   boldly  protested   against 
several   of   the   corruptions    of    Romanism,    and   it 
seems    marvellous    that    he    escaped    the    fate    of 
martyrdom.     He  was,  however,  in  God's  good  pro- 
vidence, saved  from   that  violent    death  which   his 
bitter  enemies  would  so  gladly  have  seen  inflicted 
upon   him,    and    died   peaceably  at   his   rectory   in 
1384.     But  the   spirit  which  the  Church   cherished 
towards  him  and  his  work  was. painfully  evinced  in 


ENGLISH  VERSIONS.  249 

the  next  century,  when  the  Council  of  Constance 
(141 5)  ordered  his  remains  to  be  disinterred  and 
burnt.  This  impotent  and  barbarous  decree  was 
actually  carried  out  in  1428,  and  his  ashes  were 
cast  iiito  the  streamlet  Swift,  which  runs  by  the 
spot  where  his  remains  were  burned.  Upon  this 
the  Church  historian,  Fuller,  has  happily  remarked, 
in  well-known  words,  ''Thus  this  brook  hath  con- 
veyed his  ashes  into  Avon,  Avon  into  Severn,  Severn 
into  the  narrow  seas,  they  into  the  main  ocean. 
And  thus  the  ashes  of  Wycliife  are  the  emblem  of  his 
doctrine,  which  is  now  dispersed  all  the  world  over." 
Wycliffe's  translation  was,  of  course,  made  from 
the  Vulgate.  A  striking  proof  of  this  is  furnished 
in  Gen.  iii.  15.  Wycliffe's  version  there  has,  "'She 
shall  trede  thy  head,"  thus  adopting  the  false  ren- 
dering of  the  Latin,  which,  against  both  the  original 
Hebrew  and  the  Septuagint  version,  refers  the 
bruising  of  the  serpent's  head  to  the  woman,  in- 
stead of  her  seed.  In  fact,  Wycliflfe  probably  knew 
little  or  no  Greek,  and  certainly  no  Hebrew.  But 
his  work  is  nevertheless  possessed  of  great  merit. 
Its  dialect  is  the  Midland  English,  which,  being 
used  also  by  Chaucer,  became  the  standard  of  our 
tongue.  In  style  he  is  racy  and  striking,  while  the 
general  air  of  his  version  is  dignified,  in  spite  of  its 
seeming  quaintness  and  familiarity.  Nor  is  Wycliffe 
difficult  to  read,  even  at  the  present  day.     As  Dr. 


250  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISIOJST. 

Eadie  has  remarked,  '*  One  is  surprised  to  see  how, 
when  WyclifFe's  work  is  modernized  in  spelling,  it 
so  closely  resembles  subsequent  translations  in  the 
general  aspect  of  the  version,  in  the  flow  and  posi- 
tion of  the  words,  in  the  distinctive  terms  and  con- 
necting particles,  in  the  rhythm  of  its  clauses  and 
the  mould  of  its  sentences.  Several  of  its  phrases 
must  have  passed  early  into  the  language,  especially 
those  which,  from  their  currency,  had  acquired  a 
kind  of  proverbial  power,  such  as  *  strait  gate '  and 
'narrow  way'  (Matt.  vii.  14),  'beam'  and  'mote* 
(ver.  3),  and  being  adopted  by  Tyndale,  they  have 
kept  their  place  unto  this  present."  *  A  few  examples 
of  Wycliffe's  phraseology  may  be  added.  He  uses 
the  verb  "  comfort "  in  its  original  sense  of  "  to 
strengthen."  Thus  we  find  in  Isa.  xli.  7,  the  ren- 
dering, "And  he  comforted  him  (the  idol  spoken 
of)  with  nailes,"  while  in  Phil.  iv.  13  we  have,  "I 
may  alle  thingis  in  Him  that  comforteth  me."  He 
uses  the  verb  "  nappen  "  for  "  to  sleep : "  thus  his 
rendering  of  Ps.  cxxi.  4  is,  "  He  shall  not  nappe, 
ne  slepen."  And  not  unfrequently,  it  may  be  re- 
marked, Wycliffe  uses  forms  which  still  exist  in 
Scotch,  though  they  have  died  out  in  English. 
Thus  he  has  "gett"  for  "gate,"  "tak  tent"  for 
"take  heed,"  and  "toun"  for  "piece  of  ground,'* 

*  English  Bible,  i.  72 


ENGLISH  VERSIONS.  251 

as  in  Luke  xiv.  18,  "I  have  bought  a  toun,"  the 
toun  being  still  a  familiar  expression  in  some  parts 
of  Scotland  for  a  farm-house  and  its  surroundings. 
In  many  such  cases,  it  appears  from  Wycliffe's  ver- 
sion that  what  have  often  been  deemed  Scotch 
corruptions  really  preserve  the  original  form  of  the 
words  more  accurately,  with  respect  both  to  sound 
and  sense,  than  does  modern  English. 

We  now  pass  on  to  William  Tyndale,  the 
greatest  of  all  the  translators  of  our  English  Bible. 
He  was  born  in  1477,  and  studied  both  at  Oxford 
and  Cambridge,  having  been  attracted  probably  to 
the  latter  University  by  the  presence  at  it  of  Erasmus 
from  1509  to  1 5 14.  From  a  comparatively  early 
age,  the  life  of  Tyndale  was  devoted  to  the  great 
work  of  Bible  translation.  His  high  ambition  was 
to  bring  about  such  a  state  of  matters  that  "  a  boy 
that  driveth  the  plough "  should  become  better 
acquainted  with  the  Scriptures  than  the  majority  of 
the  clergy  had  up  till  then  been.  He  was  excel- 
lently prepared  for  the  work  to  which,  with  an 
unflagging  enthusiasm,  he  dedicated  his  existence. 
Not  only  was  he  a  good  classical  scholar,  but  in 
addition  to  an  acquaintance  with  Greek,  he  possessed 
a  considerable  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  language. 
He  thus  occupied  this  position  of  advantage  over 
Wycliffe,  that  he  could  translate    directly  from  the 


252  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

original.  And  it  is  obvious  that,  while  he  availed 
himself  of  all  the  helps  he  could  command,  he 
never  servilely  adopted  any  previous  renderings,  but 
carefully  compared  them,  for  his  own  guidance,  with 
the  sacred  text.  Tyndale's  first  care  was  given  to 
the  New  Testament.  The  translation  of  that  portion 
of  Scripture  was  finished  and  printed  at  Cologne 
and  Worms  about  1525.  Vast  numbers  of  these 
and  other  editions  were  speedily  brought  over  to 
England,  where,  however,  by  order  of  the  popish 
authorities,  multitudes  of  copies  were  committed  to 
the  flames.  But  Tyndale  possessed  in  the  printing 
press  a  valuable  ally  unknown  to  any  previous 
translator  of  the  Bible  in  English.  While  the 
number  of  the  copies  of  Wycliffe's  version  which 
still  exist  shows  that  even  it  must  have  been  very 
widely  circulated,  the  art  of  printing,  of  course,  was 
far  more  effective  in  securing  constant  reproduction 
than  could  be  the  process  of  transcription.  Accord- 
ingly, though  bonfires  of  Tyndale's  New  Testament 
were  made  in  this  country,  fresh  supplies  were 
constantly  sent  from  abroad,  and  were  largely 
circulated  among  the  people. 

Meanwhile  the  author  was  busily  preparing  a 
translation  of  the  Old  Testament.  As  need  not 
be  said,  this  was  at  that  time  a  very  formidable 
task.  It  would,  indeed,  have  been  comparatively 
easy  to  take  the  Vulgate  and  translate  it  into  English 


ENGLISH   VERSIONS.  253 

But  such  was  not  the  plan  of  Tyndale.  He  meant 
to  furnish  a  version  direct  from  the  original,  and 
he  set  about  this  in  the  absence  of  any  trustworthy 
Hebrew  grammar  or  lexicon,  and  without  any  one 
to  aid  him  in  his  anxious  labour.  It  was  a  noble 
effort,  even  though  it  could  not  prove  altogether 
successful.  Tyndale  did  not  possess  that  minute 
acquaintance  with  the  Hebrew  or  the  cognate 
tongues,  which  might  have  secured  an  approach  to 
absolute  accuracy  in  the  version  which  he  produced  ; 
nor  was  he  permitted  to  finish  the  work  in  which 
he  had  engaged.  It  is  certain  that  he  had  com- 
pleted his  translation  of  the  Pentateuch,  and 
probable  that  he  had  proceeded  as  far  as  the  end  of 
Second  Chronicles  with  the  historical  books,  when, 
by  the  treachery  of  a  professed  friend,  he  was  be- 
trayed into  the  hands  of  the  papal  authorities  at 
Antwerp.  Having  been  at  once  conveyed  to  the 
castle  of  Vilvorde,  situated  some  eighteen  miles 
from  Brussels,  he  was  there  kept  a  close  prisoner 
for  more  than  a  year.  At  length  a  body  of  ecclesi- 
astics was  appointed  to  try  his  case,  among  whom 
were  some  divines  of  Louvain,  who  had  only  a 
few  years  before  sent  a  letter  of  congratulation  to 
the  Archbishop  of  St.  Andrews  in  Scotland,  when 
Patrick  Hamilton  was  in  1528  burned  at  the  stake. 
The  issue  of  a  trial  conducted  by  such  men  could 
not   be    doubtful,    and    Tyndale    was    accordingly 


254  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

condemned  to  death.  On  the  6th  of  October,  1536, 
having,  there  is  reason  to  believe,  first  been  strangled 
— and  in  so  far  more  mercifully  dealt  with  than  had 
been  the  youthful  Scottish  martyr — his  body  was 
reduced  to  ashes.  As  is  well  known,  his  last  fervent 
utterance,  the  moment  before  death,  consisted  of 
these  earnest  words, — ''Lord,  open  the  king  of 
England's  eyes."* 

The  pre-eminent  merits  of  Tyndale's  work  are 
universally  admitted  at  the  present  day.  To  it  more 
than  to  any  other  is  our  Authorised  Version  indebted 
for  the  happy  renderings  and  prevailing  melody 
which  belong  to  it.  "  From  first  to  last,"  as  has 
been  well  said,  **  his  style  and  his  interpretation  are 
his  own;  and  in  the  originality  of  Tyndale  is  included, 
in  a  large  measure,  the  originality  of  our  English 
version.  For  not  only  did  Tyndale  contribute  to  it, 
directly,  the  substantial  basis  of  half  of  the  Old 
Testament  (in  all  probability),  and  of  the  whole  of 
the  New,  but  he  established  a  standard  of  Biblical 
translation  which  others  followed.  It  is  even  of  less 
moment  that  by  far  the  greater  part  of  his  translation 
remains  intact  in  our  present  Bibles,  than  that  his 

*  The  writer  of  the  art.  "  Authorised  Version,"  in  Smith's 
Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  says  that  these  words  were  uttered  by 
Tyndale  "  as  the  axe  was  about  to  fall,"  but  it  is  certain  that  the 
martyr  was  not  beheaded.  (See  Life  of  Tyndale  by  Demaus, 
p.  481.) 


ENGLISH   VERSIONS,  255 

spirit  animates  the  whole."*  Again,  it  has  been 
remarked,  "  All  the  exquisite  grace  and  simplicity 
which  have  endeared  the  Authorised  Version  to  men 
of  the  most  opposite  tempers  and  contrasted  opinions 
— ^to  J.  H.  Newman  and  J.  A.  Froude — is  due  mainly 
to  his  clear-sighted  truthfulness.  The  desire  to 
make  the  Bible  a  people's  book  led  him  in  one 
edition  to  something  like  a  provincial  rather  than  a 
national  translation,  but  on  the  whole  it  kept  him 
free  from  the  besetting  danger  of  the  time,  that  of 
writing  for  scholars,  not  for  the  people  ;  of  a  version 
full  of  '  ink-horn '  phrases,  not  in  the  spoken 
language  of  the  English  nation.  And  throughout 
there  is  the  pervading  stamp,  so  often  wanting  in 
other  like  works,  of  the  most  thorough  truthfulness. 
No  word  has  been  altered  to  court  a  king's  favour,  or 
please  bishops,  or  make  out  a  case  for  or  against  a 
particular  opinion.  He  is  working  freely,  not  in  the 
fetters  of  prescribed  rules.  With  the  most  entire 
sincerity  he  could  say,  *  I  call  God  to  record,  against 
the  day  we  shall  appear  before  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
to  give  a  reckoning  of  our  doings,  that  I  never 
altered  one  syllable  of  God's  Word  against  my 
conscience,  nor  would  this  day,  if  all  that  is  in  the 
world,  whether  it  be  pleasure,  honour,  or  riches, 
might  be  given  me.'  "  f 

*  Westcott's  History  of  the  English  Bible ^  p.  21 1. 
f  Smith's  Diet,  of  Bible,  Auth.  Vers. 


256  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

The   translation  of  the   Scriptures   prepared  and 
published    by   Miles    Coverdale    next    calls    for 
notice.     Although  both  Henry  VIII.  and  his  bishops 
were  determinately  set  against  giving  any  counte- 
nance to  Tyndale's  version,  yet,  as  we  have  seen, 
many  copies  of  it  had  been  clandestinely  imported 
into  the  kingdom,  and  had  excited  a  strong  desire 
among  the    people    at    large,    that    an    authorised 
English  translation  should  be  issued.     For  the  exe- 
cution of  this  important  work,  Coverdale,  a  friend  of 
Cromwell,    afterwards    niade    Earl    of   Essex,    was 
selected.     The  personal  character  of  Coverdale  was, 
in  every  respect,  excellent  and  attractive,  but  he  had 
no  pretensions  to  great  force  of  mind  or  depth  of 
erudition.     Unlike  Tyndale,  he  seems  to  have  been 
little,  if  it  all,  acquainted  with   Greek  or  Hebrew, 
and  was  content  to  make  his  version  from  the  German 
and  the  Latin.     His  first  edition  came  out  in  1535, 
but  met  with  no  favour.    Having  been  printed  abroad, 
probably  at  Zurich,  it  was  suspected  of  the  taint  of 
heresy,  and  lay  neglected.     Its  flattering  dedication 
to  King  Henry  did  not  help  it  into  favour  the  less, 
perhaps,  because  coupled  with  his  name  is  that  of  the 
unfortunate  Anne  Boleyn,  who   is  described  as  his 
"  dearest,   just  wife,    and   most   virtuous   princess." 
This  mistake,  however,  was  speedily  corrected,  and 
the   name   of  Queen   Anne  exchanged  for   that  of 
Queen  Jane.     A  second  edition,  published  in  1537, 


ENGLISH  VERSIONS,  257 

obtained  the  royal  sanction ;  Henry,  after  being 
assured  by  the  bishops  that  it  contained  no  heresies, 
having  exclaimed,  "  Let  it,  then,  in  God's  name,  go 
abroad  among  our  people."  The  version  of  Cover- 
dale,  in  one  of  its  parts,  is  still  very  familiar  to 
Englishmen,  having  formed  the  basis  of  that  transla- 
tion of  the  Psalms  which  is  read  in  the  Prayer  Book 
of  the  Church  of  England.*  The  style  of  the  work 
is  animated  and  idiomatic,  and,  as  has  been  justly 
said,  "  No  little  of  that  indefinable  quality  that  gives 
popular  charm  to  our  English  Bible,  and  has  en- 
deared it  to  so  many  generations,  is  owing  to  Cover- 
dale.  .  .  .  Tyndale  gave  us  the  first  great  outline, 
distinctly  and  wonderfully  etched,  but  Coverdale 
added  those  minuter  touches  which  soften  and 
harmonize  it.  The  characteristic  features  are  Tyn- 
dale's  in  all  their  boldness  of  form  and  expression , 
the  more  delicate  lines  and  shadings  are  the 
contribution  of  his  successor,  both  in  his  own 
version  and  in  the  Great  Bible  revised  and  edited 
by  him."  t 

A  few  quaint  renderings,  out  of  many  collected 
by  Dr.  Eadie,  may  be  quoted  from  the  version  of 
Coverdale.  In  Gen.  viii.  11,  he  has,  "And  she 
(the   dove)    bare   it    in   her   nebb'' — this    last   word 


*  See  afterwards,  under  Great  Bible, 
f  Eadie' s  English  Bible,  i.  302. 

17 


258  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

being  now  in  use  only  among  the  lower  classes  in 
Scotland.  In  Job  xviii.  i,  the  patriarch  is  made  to 
say,  *'  I  am  hard  at  deathes  dore^^  a  metaphor  which  is 
also  still  to  be  heard  among  the  Scottish  peasantry. 
In  Psa.  xci.  5,  we  find  the  words  which  now  sound 
to  us  so  strangely, — "  Thou  shalt  not  need  to  be 
afraid  of  eny  bugges  by  night;  "  and  in  Jer.  viii.  52, 
we  read,  "  There  is  no  triacle  in  Galaad,"  the  word 
"triacle"  (our  ''treacle")  being  used  in  the  sense 
of  "ointment,"  having  originally  denoted  in  Greek 
a  medicinal  compound  used  as  an  antidote  against 
the  bites  of  wild  beasts,  and  gradually  assuming  the 
various  significations  of  "healing  unguent,"  and 
**  remedy  "  in  general,  until  it  became  restricted  in 
our  language  to  the  meaning  it  bears  at  the  present 
day. 

Another  English  version  of  the  Scriptures  appeared 
in  1537,  bearing  the  name  of  Thomas  Matthew. 
Since  no  one  of  this  name  is  conspicuous  in  the 
history  of  the  period,  scholars  are  generally  agreed 
that  the  real  editor  of  the  work  was  the  celebrated 
John  Rogers,  the  first  martyr  under  the  reign  of 
Queen  Mary.  The  translation  consisted  simply  of  a 
combination  of  what  had  been  previously  done  by 
Tyndale  and  Coverdale.  But,  strangely  enough, 
the  work  obtained  the  sanction  of  Henry  VIII.,  and 
a  copy  was  ordered  to  be  got  by  every  church,  the 


ENGLISH   VERSIONS.  259 

cost  being  divided  between  the  clergy  and  the  laity 
of  the  parish.  Thus  the  Bible  of  Matthew,  or 
Rogers,  became,  in  fact,  the  first  authorised 
version.  It  is  strange  to  think  that  in  this  way 
Tyndale's  work,  after  having  been  so  severely  con- 
demned, secured  royal  and  national  recognition. 
As  has  been  strikingly  said  in  regard  to  the  compi- 
lation made  by  Rogers,  **  Two-thirds  of  Matthew's 
Bible  are  Tyndale's,  and  one-third  is  Coverdale's. 
Tyndale  had  done  his  work  *  in  much  patience,  in 
afflictions,  in  necessities,  in  distresses ; '  his  name 
had  been  *  cast  out  as  evil ; '  King  Henry  had 
hated  him ;  Sir  Thomas  More  had  employed  all  his 
learning,  eloquence,  and  wit  to  hold  up  his  version 
to  malediction  and  scorn  ;  Cromwell  had  frowned 
upon  him ;  Tunstall  had  made  a  goodly  bonfire 
of  his  volumes  ;  Longland's  heart  had  been  rejoiced 
by  the  secret  simultaneous  search  for  them  in  the 
capital  and  the  two  universities;  Stokesley  had  sent 
men  to  the  flames  for  reading  them  ;  the  translator 
himself  had  been  proscribed,  *  Judasly  betrayed '  by 
English  agents,  and  burned ;  but  in  less  than  a  year 
after  his  martyrdom  his  translation  acquired  the 
royal  right  of  free  sale  and  dispersion,  having  been 
mysteriously  accepted  as  forming  the  larger  portion 
of  an  authorised  version  for  the  English  people."  * 

*  Eadie,  i,  324. 


26o  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

One  Richard  Taverner,  a  good  Greek  scholar, 
published  in  1539  a  revised  edition  of  Matthew's 
Bible,  but  this  work  had  not  much  influence  on 
subsequent  revisions  of  the  English  Bible.  Rogers 
himself,  the  real  Matthew,  seems  to  have  been  a  man 
of  the  most  dauntless  character.  It  is  recorded  that 
having  been  condemned  to  die  by  fire,  he  slept 
peacefully  throughout  the  night  preceding  his 
execution,  and  was  only  awakened  after  "  much 
shogging."  Being  informed  that  he  had  to  die 
that  day,  he  calmly  remarked,  **Then  I  need  not 
tye  my  points  ;  "  and,  after  an  affecting  meeting 
with  his  wife  and  children  on  his  way  to  the  stake, 
he  met  his  terrible  doom  in  the  most  triumphant 
spirit,  "  waving  his  hand,"  says  Foxe,  "  in  the  flame, 
as  though  it  had  been  cold  water." 

What  is  known  as  The  Great  Bible  sometimes 
bears  the  name  of  Cranmer,  although  that  illustrious 
archbishop  and  martyr  seems  to  have  had  little  or 
nothing  to  do  with  it  beyond  giving  it  his  sanction. 
It  is  also  at  times  referred  to  as  Whitchurch's  Bible : 
such,  for  instance,  is  its  name  in  the  instructions 
given  by  James  VI.  to  his  revisers.  Whitchurch 
was  simply  one  of  the  printers  of  the  first  edition  : 
he  afterwards  married  the  widow  of  Cranmer.  The 
name  of  *'the  Great  Bible  "  was  given  to  it  from  its 
size,  as  it  was   far  larger   than   any   of  the   other 


ENGLISH  VERSIONS.  2.(i\ 

editions,  its  pages  measuring  over  fifteen  inches  in 
length,  and  over  nine  inches  in  breadth.  The  text 
of  this  Bible  is,  in  substance,  a  revision  of  that  of 
Matthew,  with  many  modifications  suggested  by  the 
Latin  version  of  Erasmus.  The  work  was  done  by 
Coverdale,  who  was  ever  ready  to  correct  and  im- 
prove what  had  already  passed  under  his  hand. 
It  was  in  1539  that  the  first  edition  of  the  Great 
Bible  was  published,  and  another  with  some  changes 
came  out  in  1541.  This  Bible  was  very  popular, 
and  continued  to  be  the  "■  authorised  version " 
of  England  till  1568,*  the  years  of  Mary's  reign 
being,  of  course,  excepted.  This  accounts  for 
the  fact  that  most,  if  not  all,  of  the  passages  of 
Scripture  contained  in  the  English  Prayer-books 
of  1549  and  1552  were  taken  from  this  edition. 
The  Psalms  still  stand  in  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer  as  the  Great  Bible  presented  them ;  for 
though,  in  the  revision  which  took  place  in  1662, 
the  Gospels  and  Epistles  were  conformed  to  the 
present  Authorised  Version,  the  Psalms  were  left 
unchanged,  the  reason  assigned  being  that  "the 
choirs  were  accustomed  to  the   old  Psalter,  and  its 


*  As  Doctor  Eadie  has  remarked,  "In  the  strict  sense  it  is 
the  only  authorised  version  still  ;  for  the  Bishops'  Bible  and  the 
present  Bible  never  had  the  formal  sanction  of  royal  authority." 
(i.383.) 


262  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

language  was   considered  more  smooth   and  fit  for 
song."* 

There  next  falls  to  be  noticed  the  once  very- 
popular  Geneva  Version.  This  translation  was 
the  work  of  some  of  those  exiles  who  were  driven 
from  England  during  the  reign  of  Mary.  The 
more  rigid  section  of  them  had  betaken  themselves 
to  Geneva,  and  there  they  set  about  the  prepara- 
tion of  a  fresh  revision  of  the  Scriptures.  Several 
reasons  led  them  to  enter  on  this  task.  For  one 
thing,  the  Great  Bible  was  too  large  and  costly  for 
common  use.  It  was  also  too  colourless  as  respected 
doctrine,  having  no  expository  or  dogmatic  notes. 
The  Genevan  exiles  therefore  commenced  a  transla- 
tion of  their  own,  which  should  be  practically  more 
convenient,  and  doctrinally  should  utter  no  "  un- 
certain sound."  They  were  well  qualified  .for  the 
work  in  which  they  engaged.  Whittingham,  whose 
scholarship  was  well  known,  acted  as  editor,  and  he 
was  supported  by  such  able  coadjutors  as  Sampson, 
Gilby,  Goodman,  and  Coverdale  himself,  who  has 
already  been   frequently  referred   to    in  connection 

*  Eadie's  English  Bible,  i.  386.  It  is  interesting  to  know 
that  this  translation  anticipates  in  substance  the  rendering  of 
2  Tim.  iii.  16,  which  has  been  adopted  in  the  revised  version 
— "  All  Scripture  given  by  inspiration  of  God  is  also  pro- 
fitable," etc. 


ENGLISH  VERSIONS,  263 

with  earlier  versions  of  the  English  Bible.  Besides 
these,  John  Knox  and  other  well-known  men  of 
the  period  have  sometimes  been  named  as  having 
had  a  part  in  the  work.  Moreover,  the  translators 
doubtless  availed  themselves  of  the  labours  of  Calvin, 
Beza,  and  other  learned  men  then  resident  at  Geneva, 
who  had  long  been  familiar  with  the  study  of  Scrip- 
ture. The  men  who  had  probably  most  to  do  with 
the  formation  of  the  version  were  the  editor,  William 
Whittingham,*  a  man  of  eminent  learning,  who  was 
afterwards,  for  sixteen  years,  dean  of  Durham ; 
Thomas  Sampson,  distinguished  as  an  able  Hebrew 
scholar;  and  Anthony  Gilby,  afterwards  rector  of 
Ashby-de-la-Zouch,  and  author  of  a  commentary  on 
some  of  the  minor  prophets.  They  were  engaged  on 
their  work  '*  for  two  years  or  more,  day  and  night." 
The  New  Testament  was  first  issued  by  itself  in 
1557,  and  then  the  whole  Bible  in  1560.  The 
completed  work  was  dedicated  to  Queen  Elizabeth. 

There  is  no  question  as  to  the  great  merits  of  the 
Genevan  version.  It  rested  on  Tyndale's  version 
and  the  Great  Bible,  but  often  departs  from  both, 
generally  for  the  better.  The  popularity  which  it 
at   once    secured  was   long   retained.     In  fact,  our 

*  Dr.  Eadie  is,  for  once,  in  error  when  he  states  (ii.  5)  that 
"Whittingham  married  the  sister  of  John  Calvin.  It  has  been 
proved  that  he  married  the  sister  of  Calvin's  xvife.  (See 
Stoughton's  Our  English  Bible^  p.  190.) 


264  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

present  authorised  version  only  gained  slowly  upon 
it.  In  Scotland  especially,  the  Genevan  Bible  was 
highly  prized,  both  for  its  own  merits,  and  as  having 
proceeded  from  a  place  which  was  almost  deemed 
sacred,  as  well  as  from  the  hands  of  men  for  whom 
the  greatest  veneration  was  cherished.  It  was 
not  till  about  the  Restoration  that  the  Genevan 
Bible  *  was  entirely  superseded  by  the  Authorised 
Version. 

We  have  now  to  glance  at  what  is  known  as  The 
Bishops'  Bible,  which  was  first  issued  in  1568. 
The  reason  for  preparing  it  was  good  and  sufficient. 
When  Elizabeth  succeeded  to  the  throne  in  1558, 
the  English  Bible,  which  had  been  forbidden  to  be 
read  during  the  five  years  and  four  months  of  the 
reign  of  Mary,  was  again  allowed  a  free  circulation. 
But  it  existed  in  many  different  forms.  The  Great 
Bible  was  re-established  by  the  Queen  as  the  author- 
ised version,  but  the  Genevan  version  was  greatly 
preferred  by  the  people,  and  the  versions  of  Tyndale 
and  Coverdale  were  also  in  circulation.  It  was 
natural  that,  in  these  circumstances,  a  desire  should 
be  felt  for»yet  another  version,  which  might,  by  its 

*  The  Genevan  version  is  sometimes  spoken  of  as  "  The 
Breeches  Bible,"  from  its  rendering  of  Gen.  iii.  7,  "They 
sewed  fig-leaves  together,  and  made  themselves  breeches." 
But  the  word  "  breeches  "  had  already  been  used  by  Wycliffe. 


ENGLISH   VERSIONS.  265 

superior  merits,  unite  the  great  body  of  Englishmen 
in  its  favour,  and  so  supersede  all  the  rest.  Arch- 
bishop Parker,  then  at  the  head  of  the  English 
Church,  was  very  zealous  in  the  prosecution  of  this 
object,  and  was  strenuously  supported  by  a  number 
of  the  most  learned  among  the  bishops.  The  arch- 
bishop himself  undertook  a  large  part  of  the  work, 
while  the  remaining  books  were  assigned  to  men  of 
acknowledged  erudition.  From  the  fact  that  most 
of  the  translators  were  bishops,  this  version  received 
the  name  of  the  Bishops'  Bible,  and  great  efforts 
were  made  in  various  ways  that  it  might  prove  a 
decided  success. 

Failure,  nevertheless,  attended  it.  "  Of  all  the 
English  versions,"  it  has  been  said,  **the  Bishops' 
Bible  had  probably  the  least  success.  It  did  not 
command  the  respect  of  scholars,  and  its  size  and 
cost  were  far  from  meeting  the  wants  of  the  people. 
Its  circulation  appears  to  have  been  practically 
limited  to  the  churches  which  were  ordered  to  be 
supplied  with  it."  *  The  Bishops'  Bible  professed 
to  be  a  revision  of  the  Great  Bible,  and  did  very 
largely  adopt  its  renderings  ;  but  it  originated  some 
happy  expressions  of  its  own,  which  still  survive, 
such  as  "middle  wall"  and  "fellow-citizens"  (Eph. 
ii.  14,  19),  and  "less  than  the  least"  (Eph.  iii.  8), 

*  Smith's  Diet,  of  Bible,  iii.  1675. 


266  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

all  of  which  have  a  place  in  our  present  Authorised 
Version.* 

We  enter  a  different  region  altogether  when  we 
now  turn  to  The  Rheims  and  Douai  Version. 
This  translation  of  the  Scriptures  was  formed  under 
Roman  Catholic  auspices.  Sorely  against  the  gene- 
ral feeling  of  the  Romish  Church,  it  was  extorted  by 
the  pressure  of  circumstances,  in  order  to  counteract 
the  evil  which  was  being  done  by  what  were  called 
the  corrupt  Protestant  versions.  It  was,  of  course, 
based  upon  the  Latin  Vulgate  as  being  ''authentical," 
and  as  really  having  in  the  Papal  Church  a  practical 
superiority  assigned  to  it  over  the  Greek  and  Hebrew 
originals.  Like  the  Genevan  Bible,  the  version  now 
under  remark  was  the  work  of  English  exiles.  Many 
Romanists  left  England  when  Elizabeth  succeeded 
to  the  throne,  and  a  number  of  these  settled  at 
Douai,  in  Flanders,  in  1568.  There  a  seminary  for 
the  education  of  priests  was  established,  but  being 
broken  up,  it  found  refuge  at  Rheims,  in  France ; 
returning,  however,  to  Douai  in  1593.  It  was  at 
Rheims  that  the  New  Testament  was  published  in 
1582.  The  chief  translators  were  Gregory  Martin, 
who  was  reputed  "an  excellent  linguist,"  and 
William  Allen,  who  was  afterwards  made  a  car- 
dinal, and  was  intended  to  be  the  Romish  Primate 


*  Eadie's  Eng,  Bib.y  ii.  92. 


ENGLISH  VERSIONS.  267 


of  England,  had  the  Spanish  Armada  met  with 
success.  The  Old  Testament,  though  ready  even 
before  the  New,  was  kept  back  "for  lack  of  good 
meanes,"  and  only  came  out  at  Douai  in  1609-10. 

The  English  of  this  version  is  of  a  very  peculiar 
character.  As  Fuller  has  remarked,  ''  the  translation 
needs  to  be  translated."  The  following  are  a  few 
specimens  of  its  renderings  : — Deut.  xvi.  2,  **  Thou 
shalt  immolate  the  Phase  to  our  Lord  thy  God ;  " 
Ps.  iv.  6,  '*  The  light  of  Thy  countenance,  O  Lord, 
is  signed  upon  us  ;  "  Ps.  xxiii.  5,  "■  Thou  hast  fatted 
my  head  with  oil,  and  my  chalice  inebriating,  how 
goodlie  is  it;"  Isa.  xiii.  22,  "And  the  Syrach  owls 
shall  answer,  and  mermaids  in  the  temples  of  plea- 
sure;; "  Luke  xxii.  18,  "I  will  not  drink  of  the  gene- 
ration of  the  vine;"  i  Cor.  v.  7,  "Purge  the  old 
leaven,  that  ye  may  be  a  new  paste,  as  you  are 
Azymes;"  Gal.  vi.  i,  "  If  a  man  be  preoccupated  in 
any  fault;"  Rev.  i.  10,  "Dominical  day;"  Rev. 
xxii.  17,  "  Let  him  take  the  water  of  life  gratis." 

Yet,  w^hile  admitting  multitudes  of  such  absurd 
renderings,  the  Rhenist  translators  struck  out  not 
a  few  happy  expressions,  which  still  live  in  our  Au- 
thorised Version.  Among  these  may  be  mentioned 
"hymn"  in  Matt.  xxvi.  30;  "decease"  in  Luke 
ix.  31  ;  "commendeth"  in  Rom.  v.  8;  "bridleth  his 
tongue"  in  James  i.  26  ;  and  a  considerable  number 
of  others. 


268  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

We  now  come  to  the  Authorised  Version — the 
inheritor  of  the  excellences  of  all  the  preceding 
English  translations.  This  version,  which  has  so 
long  and  so  happily  been  the  representative  of  the 
sacred  Scriptures  in  our  language,  may  almost  be 
said  to  have  resulted  from  a  seeming  accident. 
Some  words,  uttered  apparently  without  previous 
intention,  fell  from  the  lips  of  Dr.  Reynolds,  at  the 
famous  Hampton  Court  Conference  in  1604,  as  to 
the  desirability  that  a  new  translation  of  the  Bible 
should  be  prepared.  This  proposal  at  once  com- 
mended itself  to  King  James,  as  being  quite  in  the 
line  of  his  own  predilection  for  Biblical  and  theolo- 
gical studies.  Ere  long,  therefore,  the  seed  which 
had  been  casually  dropped  germinated  and  pro- 
duced fruit.  Within  a  few  months,  the  king  wrote  to 
Bancroft,  then  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  that  he 
had  appointed  a  body  of  fifty-four  scholars  to  carry 
the  idea  of  a  new  translation  into  effect.  Forty- 
seven  were  soon  actually  at  work.  Many  of  these 
men  were  well  known  as  admirably  qualified  for  the 
great  work  which  lay  before  them.  Some  of  them, 
indeed,  such  as  Andrewes,  Overall,  and  Kilbye,  were 
among  the  most  learned  men  of  a  very  learned  age. 
They  were  instructed  not  to  aim  at  an  absolutely  new 
translation,  but  to  take  the  Bishops'  Bible  as  their 
basis,  and  subject  it  to  a  thorough  revision  by  every 
means  at  their  command.     Now,  the  Bishops'  Bible, 


ENGLISH  VERSIONS.  269 

it  will  be  remembered,  was  itself  a  revision  of  the 
Great  Bible,  and  that  again  a  revision  of  Matthew's 
Bible,  which  was,  in  fact,  a  combination  of  Cover- 
dale's  and  Tyndale's  translations;  so  that  our  Au- 
thorised Version  is  genetically  connected  with  all 
the  previous  English  versions  which  had  been  made 
directly  from  the  original  Scriptures. 

There  is  no  need  to  dwell  on  the  excellence  of  the 
result.  Eulogies  innumerable,  and  hardly  one  of 
them  exaggerated,  have  been  passed  on  our  English 
Bible.  The  very  fact  that  it  has  reigned  without  a 
rival  so  long  is  a  sufficient  proof  of  its  superiority. 
Especially  does  this,  strike  one  when  the  thought 
recurs,  that  so  many  translations  preceded  it  within 
a  very  limited  period.  In  less  than  a  century,  all  the 
versions  enumerated  above  had  been  ushered  into 
the  world,  and  had  seriously  contested  each  other's 
claims  to  be  generally  accepted  as  the  standard 
English  Bible ;  while,  during  the  two  centuries  and 
a  half  which  have  now  fully  elapsed  since  the  Author- 
ised Version  was  formed,  no  rival,  that  had  the 
slightest  chance  of  successfully  competing  with  it, 
has  entered  the  field ;  and  it  still  stands  supreme  at 
the  present  day. 

Is  there,  then,  no  need  for  a  revised  version } 
Marvellous  indeed  would  it  be,  if  _  such  were  the 
case.  Has  Biblical  learning  made  no  progress  in 
the   course   of  the   last  270  years }    and    have    no 


270  OLD    TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

changes  taken  place  in  our  own  language  during 
that  long  period,  which  call  for  a  revised  version  of 
our  English  Bible?  Having  in  a  previous  work* 
answered  these  questions  as  respects  the  New  Testa- 
ment, I  shall  now,  in  a  few  words,  glance  at  them  in 
their  bearing  upon  the  Old. 

Sufficient  proof  has  been  brought  forward,  in  some 
of  the  preceding  chapters,  that  there  are  many- 
passages  in  the  authorised  version  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment which  admit  of  being  more  accurately  trans- 
lated. To  these  multitudes  of  others  might  be  easily 
added.  Hebrew  and  the  cognate  languages  have 
been  zealously  and  fruitfully  studied  since  1611  ;  and 
the  meaning  of  the  original  is  now,  to  a  large  extent, 
better  understood.  The  natural-history  terms,  which 
occur  so  largely  in  the  Pentateuch,  may,  in  particular, 
be  here  referred  to  as  of  themselves  amply  justifying 
and  calling  for  a  revision. 

And  then  let  us  look  at  the  number  of  obsolete 
expressions  to  be  found  in  the  Old  Testament.  Page 
after  page  might  be  filled  with  lists  of  these.  Among 
them  occur  the  following,  in  addition  to  those 
formerly  mentioned  :  bosses,  taches,  knops,  haber- 
geon, tablet,  botch,  silverling,  wimple,  etc.,  and  such 
phrases  as  ''make  a  road"  (for  raid),  "evil  occur- 

*  Companion  to  the  Revised  English  Version  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment.     Cassell,  Fetter,  Galpin  and  Co. 


ENGLISH  VERSIONS.  271 

rent"  iiox  coming  against),  "dissolving  doubts"  (for 
resolving),  "woe  worth  the  day,"  ^*  and  many  such 
others.  It  may  be  doubted  if  one  English  reader 
out  of  a  hundred  attaches  any  meaning,  or,  at  least, 
anything  like  the  correct  one,  to  these  words  and 
phrases  ;  and  they  ought  therefore,  beyond  all  doubt, 
to  be  exchanged  for  others  that  are  more  generally 
intelligible. 

All  that  seem»  necessary  has  already  been  said  in 
connection  with  the  text  of  the  Old  Testament.  No 
changes  of  any  great  importance  require  to  be  made 
in  the  translation  in  consequence  of  alterations  in  the 
text  which  have  as  yet  been  demanded  by  the  pro- 
gress of  Biblical  science.  The  revision  of  the  Old 
Testament  differs  greatly  in  this  respect  from  that  of 
the  New.  There  is  no  passage  in  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures  analogous,  as  regards  change  or  omission 
of  text  required,  to  i  Tim.  iii.  16,  and  i  John  v.  7,  8. 
And  there  is  also  one  other  great  difference  between 


*  This  idiom  has,  indeed,  survived  to  our  own  day,  as  in  S  i 
"Walter  Scott's  lines  in  The  Lady  of  the  Lake: — 

worth  the  chase,  woe  worth  the  day 
That  cost  thy  life,  my  gallant  grey  !  " 

But  though  most  readers  may  have  a  vague  idea  of  the  m  eaning, 
probably  few  know  that  worth  simply  stands  for  is,  being  con- 
nected with  the  German  werden,  so  that  the  import  of  "  woe 
worth  the  day  "  is  just  "  woful  is  the  day." 


272  OLD   TESTAMENT  REVISION. 

the  two  revisions.  While  the  essential  meaning  of 
the  Greek  has  only  in  a  very  few  places  been  missed 
by  our  common  English  translation,  it  will,  beyond 
doubt,  be  found  that  positive  mistakes  in  that  ver- 
sion, as  to  the  real  signification  of  Hebrew  words  and 
phrases,  have  given  rise  to  the  great  majority  of  the 
diiferences  perceptible  between  its  renderings  and 
those  of  the  revised  version  of  the  Old  Testament. 


INDEX   OF   TEXTS. 


PAGE 

PAGE 

Genesis  ii.  4,  5 

- 

45 

Exodus  xii.  35  - 

-     51 

iii.  15     -         -        - 

- 

236 

xii.  36    -        -        . 

-     51 

iv.  8       - 

- 

168 

xii.  40    - 

-   171 

viii.  II   - 

- 

257 

xvii.  14  - 

-    33 

X.  21,  24 

- 

I 

xix.  2      -         -         • 

-    35 

xi.  5       - 

- 

220 

xxiii.  20 

-    90 

xii.  6      -        -        - 

- 

43 

xxiv.  4    - 

-     34 

xii,  9      -         -         - 

- 

46 

xxxiii.  14,  15  - 

-    90 

xiii.  18   - 

- 

46 

xxxiv.  13 

-     52 

xiv.  13    - 

- 

46 

xxxiv.  27 

-     33 

xvi.  5     - 

- 

144 

xxxiv.  33 

-    53 

xviii.  I    - 

- 

46 

Leviticus  v.  16 

-    54 

xxviii.  70 — 22 

- 

46 

vi.  21     -        -        ■ 

-    54 

xxxi.  19,  34,  35       - 

- 

47 

vii.  12    - 

-    54 

xxxii.  24          -         • 

- 

41 

viii.  15    - 

-    54 

xxxiv.  30         -         - 

- 

87 

xi.  6 

-  188 

xxxvi.  24         -         - 

- 

48 

xiii.  46    - 

-    41 

xxxvii.  28       •         - 

- 

48 

xvi.  8      -         -         . 

-    54 

xxxix.  I           -         - 

- 

48 

xviii.  18 

.        -     56 

xliv.  5     ■ 

- 

34 

xviii.  21 

-  209 

xlvii.  31 

- 

140 

xxvi.  46- 

-     34 

xlix.  10  - 

- 

48 

xxvii.  29 

-    41 

Exodus  ii.  ii,  12 

- 

50 

xxvii.  34 

-     34 

iii.  22     - 

- 

51 

Numbers  v.  3  - 

-     41 

ix.  5 

- 

51 

x.  32       - 

.        .     63 

x.  14      - 

- 

41 

xi.  5        - 

-     35 

xi.  2       - 

- 

51 

xiv.  21 — 23     - 

-    57 

xii.  12    - 

- 

41 

xxiii.  7 — 10   .- 

-     14 

10 


274 


INDEX  OF  TEXTS. 


PAGE 

PAG- 

Numbers  xxiii.  18—24 

- 

57 

Job  iv.,  v.  - 

-     9« 

xxiv.  3 — 9 

- 

59 

vi.  14     - 

-       IC 

xxxiii.  2- 

- 

34 

xviii.  I    - 

-      .  -  25^ 

Deuteronomy  ii.  23 

- 

77 

xix.  25 — 27     - 

-  10; 

vi.  4       - 

- 

144 

xxii.  29  - 

-       IC 

vii.  5       -        "        " 

- 

63 

xxxiii.  23,  24  - 

-  10^ 

xvi.  2      -         -         - 

- 

267 

xxxvi.  29—33 

-    IO_ 

xvi.  21    - 

- 

63 

xxxix.  II 

•     5^ 

xxvii.  4  - 

- 

170 

Psalms  i.  3 

-     9. 

xxxi.  9    - 

- 

36 

ii.  12      -        - 

-    9. 

xxxii.  40,  42  - 

- 

64 

iv.  6 

-  26 

xxxiii.  I — 29  - 

- 

65 

xvi.  I — 4 

-     9 

Joshua  v.  14     - 

- 

71 

xviii.  31 

-     i< 

viii.  31,  32     . 

- 

30 

xix.  I — 4 

-     9 

Judges  iv.  10    - 

- 

75 

xvii.  12  - 

-     I 

V.  18       - 

- 

75 

xxii.  21   - 

-     5 

V.  15—31 

- 

72 

xxiii.  5    - 

-  26 

XV.  19     - 

- 

83 

xxiv.  6    - 

-     9 

XX.  26     - 

- 

83 

xxx.  5     - 

-  20 

I  Samuel  xv.  22 

- 

39 

xl.  6        - 

-     3 

xvii.  8    - 

- 

221 

xlvi.  5     - 

-     9 

XXV.  22  - 

- 

87 

Ii.  16,  17 

-     3 

2  Samuel  xiv.  14 

- 

13 

Ixxx.  8   - 

-     I 

I  Kings  ii.  3      - 

- 

30 

Ixxxiv.  4 — 7    - 

-     9 

iii.  4       -         -        - 

- 

210 

xci.  5      - 

-  25 

iv.  24      -        -        - 

- 

76 

xcii.  10  - 

-     I 

xvii.  6    - 

- 

4 

xcvi.  10  - 

-  15 

XX.  42     - 

- 

41 

cxix.  92  - 

-  21 

2  Kings  vii.  3    - 

- 

41 

cxxi.  4    - 

-  25 

2  Chronicles  xxx.  iS 

- 

iO 

cxxiv,  3  - 

-    9 

Ezra  iii.  2          -        - 

- 

30 

cxxvii.  2 

-     9 

iv.  2 — 6  - 

- 

176 

cxxxvii.  9 

-    7 

iv.  8 — vi.  18   - 

- 

19 

Proverbs  v.  16 

-  16 

vii.  12—26      - 

- 

19 

viii.  22  —  31     - 

-  10 

Nehemiah  vlii.  I 

- 

30 

viii.  31  •  - 

-    IC 

Esther  ix.  7     - 

- 

145 

xi.  16      - 

-  10 

Job  iii.  20 — 24  - 

- 

15 

xiv.  17    - 

-     I 

INDEX  OF  TEXTS. 


275 


PAGE 

PAGE 

ECCLE";IASTES 

xii.  I 

-7 

- 

109 

Malachi  iii.  i  - 

- 

- 

89 

SAIAH  ii.  2 

- 

209 

iv.  4 

- 

- 

30 

V.    I 

. 

10 

V.  7 

- 

77 

APOCRYr: 

I  A. 

vii.  14 — 16 

- 

78 

I  Esdras  iv.  38- 

-41 

. 

. 

118 

vii.  14     - 

- 

225 

TOBIT  V.  16 

. 

- 

121 

viii.  19,  20 

- 

78 

Wisdom  iii.  4    - 

. 

. 

127 

ix.  I 

- 

79 

V.  8— 16 

. 

. 

128 

ix.  5         - 

- 

150 

xi.  26 

- 

. 

127 

xiii.  22    - 

- 

2  5/ 

Ecclesiasticus 

xi. 

7 

. 

129 

xxvi.  20  - 

- 

208 

xiii.  9,  10 

- 

129 

xli.  7 

- 

230 

xiii.  23    - 

- 

- 

129 

lii-  13-15 

- 

79 

xviii.  8 — 13     - 

- 

- 

130 

liii.  I — 12 

- 

80 

XXV.  20  - 

. 

. 

129 

Ivi.  10     - 

- 

10 

xxxviii.  25 

_ 

- 

129 

Ix.  8        - 

- 

210 

1.  5—10 

- 

- 

129 

Ixiii.  9     - 

- 

90 

I  Maccabees  ii. 

5- 

-13 

- 

133 

Ixvi.  23  - 

- 

:-IO 

iv.  14 — 24 

- 

133 

Jeremiah  vii. 

22 

- 

1>1 

2  Maccabees  iv. 

13 

- 

- 

160 

vii.  21 — 24 

- 

38 

V.  20      - 

. 

. 

134 

xvii.  9     - 

- 

Si 

viii.  18   - 

-    • 

. 

134 

XXV.  20  - 

- 

77 

xiii.  26   - 

_ 

„ 

134 

EzEKiEL  xxvii. 

II 

- 

Zi 

Daniel  ix.  24 

-27 

- 

III 

Matthew  vi.  13 

. 

. 

44 

HOSEA  iv.  18 

- 

83 

vii.  14     - 

. 

. 

250 

vi.  6 

- 

39 

ix.  9—17 

- 

- 

194 

xii.  4 

- 

41 

ix.  13      .      •   . 

. 

•- 

39 

xiv.  8     - 

- 

84 

xii.  7       -         - 

- 

- 

39 

Joel  ii.  2  - 

- 

41 

xxi.  42    - 

- 

- 

190 

iii.  4 

- 

84 

xxii.  24  - 

. 

. 

30 

Amos  v.  17 

- 

41 

xxiii.  23 

. 

. 

40 

Nahum  iii.  8 

^z. 

169 

xxvi.  30  - 

. 

. 

188 

Habakkuk  iii 

.  I — 

16 

- 

85 

xxvii.  9  - 

_ 

. 

Z^ 

Zephaniah  iii 

•3 

- 

10 

Mark  ii.  13 — 22 

. 

. 

194 

Haggai  ii.  7 

- 

- 

88 

V.  41 

_ 

. 

190 

Zechariah  xi 

13 

- 

88 

x.  4        . 

. 

. 

30 

xiv.  20    - 

- 

- 

- 

146 

xii.  24    - 

- 

- 

190 

76 


INDEX  OF  TEXTS. 


PAGE 

PAGE 

Luke  v.  27 — 39 

- 

- 

194 

Acts  xxi.  40 

181 

ix.  31      - 

- 

267 

Romans  v.  8 

-    267 

ix.  52,  53 

- 

170 

ix.  5       - 

-     150 

xiv.  18    - 

- 

251 

2  Corinthians  iii. 

13 

-    53 

xxii.  18  - 

- 

267 

Galatians  iii.  17 

-  172 

xxiv.  27  - 

- 

179 

vi.  I 

-  267 

xxiv.  32  - 

- 

190 

Ephesians  ii.  14,  i< 

?- 

-  265 

John  iv.  9 

- 

170 

iii.  8 

-  265 

V.  3»  4    - 

- 

44 

Philippians  iv.  13 

-  250 

V.  39       - 

- 

179 

I  Timothy  iii.  16 

-  271 

vi.  31      - 

- 

180 

Hebrews  i.  6    - 

-  186 

vii.  19     - 

- 

30 

xi.  21      - 

-  146 

vii.  41     - 

- 

190 

xi.  35—38       - 

-  136 

Acts  iv.  25 

- 

94" 

James  i.  26 

-  267 

vii.  6 

- 

172 

I  John  v.  7,  8   - 

-  271 

vii.  37     - 

- 

44 

Revelation  i.  10 

-  267 

XV.  16,  17 

- 

186 

xxii.  17  - 

-  267 

XV.  21      - 

a 

- 

30 

GENERAL    INDEX. 


Aben  Ezra  on  Hebrew  punctua- 
tion, 151 
Accent,  importance  of,  148 
Addison  quoted,  97 
^schylus,  text  of,   referred  to, 

yEthiopic  version,  239 

Alexander  the  Great,  influence 
of,  159 

Alexandria,  Jews  in,  160 

Alford,  Dean,  quoted,  196 

Angel  of  the  Covenant,  90 

Apocrypha,  meaning  of  word, 
116 

Apocrypha  referred  to  in  New 
Testament,  136 

Apocrypha,  value  of,  115,  134 

Aquila,  version  of,  224 

Aramaic  version  of  Old  Testa- 
ment never  existed,  183 

Aramaic,  its  influence  on  He- 
brew, 18 

Aristeas,  letter  of,  162 

Armenian  version,  241 

Ashtaroth,  64 

Assonances  in  Hebrew,  13,  77 

Astruc  on  Genesis,  44 

Augustine,  St.,  on  Septuagint, 
167 

Authorised  version,  caprices  of, 
77 


Authorised  version, how  formed, 

245  . 
Authorised    version,    vagueness 

of,  72 

Azazel,  54 

Balaam's  prophecies,  57 
Bancroft,  Archbishop,  268 
Baruch,  Book  of,  131 
Bishops'  Bible,  264 
Bissell,  Dr.,  on  Apocrypha,  125 
Bleek  on  disuse  of  Hebrew,  182 
British  Quarterly  Review  quoted, 

151 

Cabala  of  Jews,  what,  207 
Ccesar  quoted,  59 
Chalmers,  Dr.,  quoted,  41 
Christology  of  Old  Testament, 

49 
Clementine  Vulgate,  235 
Contemporary    Review    quoted, 

207 
Cornhill  Magazine  quoted,  193 
Council  of  Trent,  234 
Coverdale's  version,  256 
Criticism,  object  of,  50 

Daniel,  Aramaic  passage  in,  19 

Additions  to,   132 

Book  of,  11 1 


278 


GENERAL  INDEX. 


Davidson,    Dr.    S.,    quoted    or 

referred  to,   77,  83,  95,  135, 

246 
Deborah,  song  of,  72 
Deceased  wife's  sister,  marriage 

with,  56 
Delbos  quoted,  12 
Demaus  referred  to,  254 
Deutsch,  Em.,  quoted  or  referred 

to,  20,  171,  184,  202,  218 
De  Wette  referred  to,  18,  156 
Discussions  on  the  Gospels  quoted, 

Dogmatic    bias    supposed    in 

A. v.,  81 
Douai  version,  266 

Eadie,    Dr.,  quoted  or  referred 
to,  247,  250,   257,   259,  261, 
263,  266 
Ecclesiasticus,  Book  of,  128 
Egyptian  versions,  239 
Eichhorn  referred  to,  196 
Elijah's  ravens,  4 
Eliphaz,  first  speech  of,  99 
Esdras,  First  Book  of,  118 

Second  Book  of,  119 

Esther,  Additions  to,  124 
Evolution  of  doctrine,  185 
Ezra,  Aramaic  passage  in,  19 

Farrar,  Canon,  quoted,  9,  191 
Fathers,    early,   on    Septuagint, 

166 
Frankel  on  Septuagint,  165 
Fuller  on  Rhenish  version,  267 

Gemarah.  meaning  of  word,  204 
Genesis  Book  of,  28« 
Geneva  version,  262 
Gerizim,  Mount,  177 
Gospels,    objection    of   learned 

Jew  to,  199 
Gospels,  problem  of,  193,  197 
Gothic  version,  240 


Great  Bible,  260 
Greek,  spread  of,  158 
Greek,  usual  language  of  Christ, 
190 

Haggadah,  what,  205 
Halachah,  what,  205 
Hall,  Robert,  quoted,  128 
Hamilton,  Patrick,   referred  to, 

253 
Havernick  quoted,  1 12 
Hebi-evv  accents,  148,  15 1 

Bible,  contents  of,  20 

language  died  out,  19 

onomotopoetic,  13 

of  New  Testament,  what, 

181 

occasional  ambiguity  of,  3 

roots,  number  of,  8 

patois  of  Palestine,  190 

very  metaphorical,  lO 

manuscripts,  144 

why  so  called,  i 

Hengstenberg  referred  to,  41 
Henry  VHI.  sanctions  Matthew's 

Bible,  259 
Hershon,  Mr.,  on  Talmud,  203 
Hertzogon  Hebrew  language,  II 
Hexapla  of  Origen,  226 

Irenseus  quoted,  155 
Itala,  what,  232 

James  VI.  at  Hampton  Court, 

268 
Jeremiah,  Aramaic  passage   in, 

Jei-ome's,  St.,  version,  233 
Jews  in  time  of  Christ  bilingual, 

192 
Job,  Targum  of  Book  of,  221 
Jonathan,  Targum  of,  220 
Josephus,  canon  of,  20 
Josephus,  passage  in,  explained, 

192 


GENERAL  INDEX. 


279 


Jowett,    Prof.,    on    St.    Paul's 

knowledge  of  Hebrew,  187 
Judith,  Book  of,  122 
Justin  Martyr  referred  to,  155 

Kabala  of  Jews,  207 
Karaite  Jews,  154,  206 
Kitto,  Dr.,  quoted,  4 
Knox,  John,  referred  to,  263 

Lagarde,  Prof.,  referred  to,  56 
Latin  versions  of  Old  Testament, 

229 
Literal  translation  unsuitable,  87 
Logos  doctrine,  107 
Longfellow  quoted,  loi,  207 
Louvain,  divines  of,  253 
Lowth,  Bp.,  quoted,  15,  16 
Lucretius,    text  of,  referred  to, 

139 

Luther  on  Apocrypha,  126,  135 
Lyndsay,  Sir  David,  quoted,  76 

Maccabees,  First  Book  of,  133 

Second  Book  of,  134 

Manasseh,  Prayer  of,  132 
Marsh,  Bp.,  referred  to,  196 
Massorah,  meaning  of  word,  142 
Massorets,  labours  of,  142 
Matthew's  version,  258 
Memphitic  version,  239 
Messianic  passages,  49,  62,  1 13 
Midrash,  meaning  of  word,  205 
Milton  quoted,  150 
Mishnah,  meaning  of  word,  204 
Mistakes  in  A.V.  of  Old  Testa- 
ment, 272 

Night  noughts,  Young's,  quoted, 

128 
Noldeke  referred  to,  140 

Obsolete  terms  in  A.V.,  52,  270 
Old  Latin,  what,  232 
Onkelos,  Targum  of,  219 


Ormulum  referred  to,  247 

Palestine  for  Philistia,  84 
Paradise,  supposed  language  of, 

II 
Parallelism,  various  kinds  of,  15 
Parker,  Archbp.,  265 
Pentateuch,  the  Mosaic  author- 
ship of,  30,  34,  37 
Pentateuch,  interpolations  in,  43 
Peshito,  meaning  of  word,  228 
Pilgrim^ s  Progress   referred   to, 

205 
Plautus  referred  to,  no 
Polano,  Mr.,  quoted,  214 
Psalms,  translation  of,  93 

translation    in     Prayer 

Book,  261 

Punctuation,  importance  of,  149 

Quarterly  Review  referred    to, 

202 
Quotations  of  Old  Testament  in 

New,  187 

Rabbis,  exaggerations  of,  212 

quibbling  of,  209 

Redeemer  of  Job,  102 
Renan  on  Hebrew  roots,  9 
Revision,    need   of    Old   Testa- 
ment, 269 
Rheims  version,  266 
Rogers,  John,  courage  of,  260 

Samaritan  Pentateuch,  157 

value  of, 

168 
Samaritans  and  Jews,  170 
Saturday  Review  quoted,  203 
Scotch  language,  251 

wi'iters  of  last  century, 

193 

Scott,  Sir  Walter,  quoted,  271 
Scriptures  among  the  Jews,  181 
Semitic  speech,  2 


28o 


GENERAL   INDEX. 


Septuagint,  the  Bible  of  Christ, 

185 
Septuagint,  how  esteemed  by  the 

Jews,  163 
Septuagint,    traditional  account 

of,  160 
Se.ptuagint,  value  of,  168 
Shigionoth,    meaning   of  word, 

Shiloh,  how  to  be  rendered,  48 
Sixtine  Vulgate,  235 
Slavonic  version,  241 
Smith,  Dr.  R.,  quoted,  24,  26, 

138,  169,  181,  187 
Speaker  s  Co»it?ienfary,^'],  65.  68 
Stanley,  Dean,  candour  of,  164 
quoted,   35.   176, 

188 
Strack  on  Hebrew  MSS.,  153 
St.  James'  Epistle,  diction  of,  126 
Symmachus,  version  of,  225 
Syriac  versions,  227 

Talmud,  what,  203 
Talmudic  period,  205 


Targums,  what,  217 
Taverner's  Bible,  260 
Teraphim.  what,  47 
Tetrapla  of  Origen,  226 
Text  of  Old  Testament,  271 
Thebaic  version,  239 
Theodotion's  version,  225 
Thrupp,  Mr.,  on  Hebrew  MSS. 

152 
Tobit.  Book  of,  120 
Tregelles,  Dr.,  referred  to,  229 
Tyndale's  version,  251 

Versions  of  Old  Testament,  242 
Vulgate,  Latin,  234 

Welihausen,    Prof.,  referred  to, 

38 
Westcott,    Canon,  quoted,  228, 

254 
Whitchurch's  Bible,  260 
Whiitingham  and   Geneva  ver- 
sion, 262 
Wisriom,  Book  of,  126 
i   Wibcman,  Cardinal,  quoted,  191 


